We've just started developing this site and would love your feedback

ClimateWorks and Seed Advisory submission to COAG Consultation


ClimateWorks and Seed Advisory jointly provided this 6 page submission to the COAG consultation process asking about both:
1)  The need for a central register of installed battery storage facilities; and
2)  A process by which it might be developed and maintained.

In its submission (which has no date, so we have assumed 20th September), the parties advocate adopting an approach that is commensurate with the benefits being sought (or risks to be mitigated).  They say:

“Looking at the Consultation Paper’s wider discussion, we appreciate that equipment connected to the distribution grid may represent a risk to the safety of the network, line workers and the local community under certain conditions. We’re concerned that in considering remedies to manage the risks, remedies should be appropriate and proportionate to the risks identified, and whatever remedy is proposed should not create an unnecessary cost burden to customers. “

In our summary page here we listed the 4 key reasons we’d initially identified as why an Energy Storage Register could be required:

Reason 1 = To assist First Responders  In this submission we did not see any specific mention to First Responders apart from a more general reference to:

“residual risks presented by the installation to … the local community”

Where they are provided, we link to other articles referencing assistance to first responders as a reason for the Energy Storage Register.

Reason 2 = To assist in any potential future product recalls In this submission we did not see any specific mention to Product Recalls apart from a more general reference to:

“residual risks presented by the installation to … the local community”

Where they are provided, we link to other articles referencing potential future product recalls as a reason for the Energy Storage Register.

Reason 3 = To assist with life-cycle management In this submission we did not see any specific mention to Life-Cycle Management apart from a more general reference to:

“residual risks presented by the installation to … the local community”

Where they are provided, we link to other articles referencing life-cycle management as a reason for the Energy Storage Register.

Reason 4 = To assist with electricity system operations and planning. In its submission, the parties go into some detail about the need that the AEMO and the network business might have for data that would be stored in an Energy Storage Register.

However there’s no single passage I could extract to include here.

Where they are provided, we link to other articles referencing electricity system operations and planning intelligence as a reason for the Energy Storage Register.

In the submission, the parties mention their “recently launched Plug and Play project”.  They note that:

“The Plug and Play project focusses on identifying and reducing the costs to consumers and the economy of the current processes for setting, interpreting and applying standards for grid connected generation and supporting technologies, such as battery storage. The objective of the project is to identify policy solutions that reduce costs to consumers and the economy to an efficient level, and provide a basis for product innovation and consumer uptake of future technological changes, while safeguarding the performance of the grid.”

In a quick scan of their websites, however, we could not find more details on the project.  We will look forward to learning more as time progresses.