House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Electricity Generation Electricity Generation Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN House of Assembly Stuart Electricity Generation Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (14:46): A question again for the Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy: can the minister confirm that in the last quarter of 2016, 61 per cent of South Australia's total electricity supply, or 1,488 gigawatt hours, was delivered by renewable generation and, if so, has the government failed to disclose that its own target has been exceeded because this extreme penetration of intermittent energy sources exposes the South Australian network to much greater risk of blackout than anywhere else in Australia? The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly West Torrens Minister for Finance Minister for State Development Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy Electricity Generation The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Treasurer, Minister for Finance, Minister for State Development, Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy) (14:47): And yet the shadow minister writes to me asking for more intermittent renewable energy in Port Augusta. Mr van Holst Pellekaan House of Assembly Mr van Holst Pellekaan: In storage. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Stuart is on two warnings. An honourable member interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: No you weren't. The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: So intermittency is okay if it's got storage. So are the issues of intermittency the problem of our frequency control or about demand management, or is it all too much for you to understand—not you, Mr Speaker, but members opposite? How can the member hold in his mind the two opposing thoughts, when he is saying that there is far too much renewable energy in the system, yet write to me and put on Twitter that he has written to me wanting more renewable energy? Which one is it? Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: Point of order: the minister was asked whether 61 per cent was the figure for the last quarter of last year, and all of his answer has been commenting on members of the opposition. The Hon. J.M. Rankine interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Wright is warned for the second and the last time. The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: We have an aspiration of obviously a 50 per cent target because we think it brings investment and it brings jobs and creates wealth in the state. Of course we are trying to meet our Paris commitments as a nation. An honourable member House of Assembly An honourable member: It's unaffordable. The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Well, if it's unaffordable to meet the Paris commitments, why did the Prime Minister sign that agreement as members interject? So if members are going to attack the Prime Minister, at least have the courage to do so publicly rather than by sneaky little interjections. I have to say that the truth about renewable energy is not the boogieman that the opposition makes it out to be. Renewable energy is good for our country. Renewable energy creates jobs and wealth and provides us with competition. It is affordable. It helps meet demand. The mythmaking by the coal lobby and the conservative end of the political spectrum, quite frankly, is misguided. If the last quarter was 61 per cent, 80 per cent, 40 per cent, 43½ per cent, either way we are treating the NEM as one market—one market. If it's one market— An honourable member interjecting: The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Yeah, yeah! So it's not now one market. So the members who sold the asset into a market now say it is not one market; it's a series of small little markets. If that's the case, it's broken because it is meant to be one big market. That is what members opposite don't understand about renewable energy. Quite frankly, renewable energy is good for our economy. It's good for the state. If it was doing harm to our economy, we would say so.