The Queensland government needs to lead the way with solar energy and privatisation of state-owned assets should never be on the table, an international trade union and energy advocate says.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It comes as the solar debate in Queensland was ignited following severe storms in South Australia that left the entire state without power.
Professor Sean Sweeney, who is touring the country and will speak to Electrical Trade Union (ETU) members in Brisbane on Friday, said governments could not afford to not ditch fossil fuels for renewable energy due to climate change.
The ETU has vocally opposed privatisation under both the Bligh and Newman governments.
Professor Sweeney said governments needed to provide leadership, but the private sector could still be involved.
"Stop pretending that you can incentivise renewable power to the level that's actually going to be sufficient to displace fossil fuels," he said.
"The leadership must come from the public sector.
"It is the Sunshine State, you should have more solar power under public control."
Professor Sweeney said due to energy flowing in both directions when using renewable power, grids had to be upgraded, which private companies would not want to pay for.
"The renewable energy companies - wind and solar companies - they want to sell electricity but they don't want to pay for the distribution," he said.
Professor Sweeney is the director of the International Program on Labor, Climate & Environment at the Murphy Institute, City University of New York.
He also coordinates Trade Unions for Energy Democracy (TUED) a global network of 51 unions from 17 countries.
Professor Sweeney said privatisation rarely gave the "shot in the arm" needed to balance the books.
"Let's say, for example, you sell an electricity system that employs 50,000 workers and the company lays off 25,000," he said.
"Who's paying the employment benefits for those workers?... They're no longer spending in the local economy because they don't have any money, it puts stress on social systems and society doesn't benefit.
"I don't think we have to go very far to look for a negative example."
It comes after the privatisation debate resurfaced on September 20 after Opposition Leader Tim Nicholls was forced to deflect criticism from former Liberal heavyweights over scrapping the controversial Strong Choices campaign.
Mr Nicholls ruled out the Strong Choices policy taken to the previous election, but left the door open for some form of privatisation in the future.
Treasurer Curtis Pitt said the government was implementing its Debt Action Plan without the need for asset sales.
"The Palaszczuk Government's guarantee to keep income-generating assets in public hands for the public good is well known," Mr Pitt said.
"Our position ensures that Queensland taxpayers, and not private shareholders, continue to gain the benefit of the returns from these assets of around $2 billion a year."
On Wednesday, South Australia was plunged into darkness after a storm knocked out three transmission lines and 22 towers, forcing the electricity connection between South Australia and Victoria - known as an "interconnector" to be shut down.
It put solar energy under the spotlight, with federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg and other MPs questioning the state's increasing reliance on renewable energy, despite assurances that the switch to cleaner energy sources was not to blame.
Labor Premier Jay Weatherill said the system operated as planned, insisting the lengthy outage was caused by bad weather and renewable energy was not to blame.
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said the Queensland government-owned transmission company, Powerlink Queensland, had offered assistance to South Australia to restore its electricity supplies.
On Thursday, Mr Nicholls said the South Australia power outage raised questions about energy security because of the state's reliance on renewable energy.
"We don't want to see that happen in Queensland but unfortunately under the Palaszczuk Labor Government's 50 per cent renewable target by 2030, there is a very real chance that might happen," Mr Nicholls said.
"We should have a nationally consistent position in relation to the generation of renewables.
"There is a role for renewable energy but it should not be done at the expense of energy security."
Mr Nicholls said the federal government's target for renewable energy - which is 23.5 per cent - would be a "good starting point".
"It is ridiculous to have all of those targets (at a state level) when we also have a national, agreed about, bipartisan, agreed upon target of 23 per cent across the country," he said.
"Let's settle on that one realistically and achieveably."
