InvestSMART

Oversupply is rife, just don't call it gold plating

IT WAS media management at its slickest.
By · 1 Feb 2013
By ·
1 Feb 2013
comments Comments
IT WAS media management at its slickest. The press release lobbed on Monday, January 7. It was holidays. No one cared. It was hot. The third Test was in the news. Warnie had got in an argument about something.

Few eyes were peeled for media releases from the office of Chris Hartcher, the NSW Minister for Resources and Energy.

Even then, the release managed to ramble on for an entire page without actually saying anything. PR at its finest, crafted to induce an instant drooping of the eyelids.

Anyway, it was a press release about a report, a report headlined by the eye-catching title, "Interim Report Mid North Coast Review".

Riveting stuff.

As it turns out, after all that kerfuffle last year about "gold plating" by energy companies - arising partly from the hue and cry by farmer Bruce Robertson and the Manning Alliance - the government must have commissioned a report.

Written by engineer Robert Rollinson, it is remarkably forthright, and does the government no favours.

Extrapolating from the findings, it would not require the drawing of too long a bow to deduce that "gold plating" is rife.

Gold plating is the excessive expenditure by electricity networks on poles and wires to increase their revenue (under the National Electricity Market regulatory framework, the more the power companies spend, the more they get paid - and this spending is the single biggest component of the rise in our power bills).

In the Rollinson Report, the words "gold plating" are not mentioned once. But there is no mistaking the findings.

Here is an experienced engineer and financier from Macquarie Bank who simply fails to understand why the network providers plan to spend the millions they do.

The big question, which we will get to soon, concerns the message about electricity companies around the country. If this gold plating is rife in one part of NSW, how many billions are being wasted, indeed added to our power bills, Australia-wide?

First, to the specifics in the report that vindicate such a joining of the dots.

"Based on [reports by the transmission provider] the review has found it difficult to gain a complete understanding of the reasons for the promotion of a 330kV solution that was originally proposed by TransGrid," writes Rollinson.

He is talking about a TransGrid proposal to build a line of those big coathangers between Stroud and Taree on NSW's mid-north coast, a plan that brought trenchant opposition from the Manning Alliance group of locals who argued, in the end successfully, that demand for electricity was simply not there to support the project.

Among Rollinson's recommendations, of which the first included suspending the project, was for a better consultation process.

"The public consultation process used by TransGrid for this project should be independently reviewed to identify improvements that can be made."

Nationally, the concern is not simply about TransGrid. It just happens to be the subject of this report. All the state network providers have been accused (and in some cases pinged by the regulators) for unnecessary spending.

Rollinson is saying there should be independent reviews, generally, not just of the NSW project. And he doesn't spell this out, but as the entire industry is prone to overspending, thanks to its structure of regulated returns, surely it is not this project alone that bears scrutiny.

If one network provider were about to spend almost $300 million on an unnecessary project, how much gold plating is really going on out there?

Mark Byrne, of the Total Environment Centre, says residents on the far-north coast of NSW have been fighting a proposal by TransGrid and Country Energy to spend $227 million on new power lines.

"It was based on dubious demand forecasts for the entire north coast region," says Byrne. Residents claimed a win last year when the project was put on ice for a year - delayed, not abandoned.

Similar allegations of gold plating have been levelled at SP AusNet and the distributors in Victoria, and of Powerlink, Ergon Energy and Energex in Queensland (though it is said to have made more progress in demand management than its southern peers).

Since the matter of gold plating achieved prominence last year - and in response to the public backlash over energy prices - there have been savings and deferment of projects announced of some $2.85 billion over the next 18 months in NSW alone (that's from the earmarked $16.6 billion in spending for the five-year regulatory period to June 2014).

Arousing further suspicions over the basis for industry spending are Rollinson's observations about electricity consumption.

Bruce Robertson told BusinessDay the report vindicated everything the Manning Alliance had been saying. "You would think they [the networks] would have identified major customers who were going to use the stuff [electricity]," he said.

Sadly, the mid-north coast is one of the poorer regions of Australia. Some 25 per cent of the rate base of the city of Taree is on benefits. Population is tipped to grow at a little over 1 per cent. Against this backdrop of energy poverty, demand is just not there, says Robertson.

According to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, the average annual electricity bill for Country Energy customers is $2520, which is 39 per cent higher than in the city.

"People simply can't afford the product," says Robertson. "The industry isn't doing the basic demographic data."

Indeed, electricity can be considered more than a product. It is an essential service, one whose cost can promote or drag down the entire economy.

And it is the rise in the price of this commodity over the past few years - now running at a 17 per cent annual increase - that has dampened demand.

Industry has been its worst enemy.

The price rises have killed demand and now the spectre of overcapacity looms.
Google News
Follow us on Google News
Go to Google News, then click "Follow" button to add us.
Share this article and show your support
Free Membership
Free Membership
InvestSMART
InvestSMART
Keep on reading more articles from InvestSMART. See more articles
Join the conversation
Join the conversation...
There are comments posted so far. Join the conversation, please login or Sign up.

Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…

Gold plating refers to excessive spending by electricity network companies on poles, wires and other network assets to boost regulated returns. Under Australia’s National Electricity Market rules the more these networks spend, the more revenue they can earn, and that spending is a major driver of rising power bills. Investors should care because regulatory scrutiny, deferred projects or changes to how returns are calculated can affect network cash flows and the value of regulated assets.

The Rollinson Report — an independent review of the TransGrid proposal between Stroud and Taree — said it was difficult to justify the promotion of a 330kV solution and recommended suspending the project and improving the public consultation process. Although the report never used the phrase “gold plating,” its findings point to possible over‑investment and weak justification for the high‑cost proposal.

The article notes similar allegations have been levelled nationally — including at SP AusNet in Victoria and Powerlink, Ergon Energy and Energex in Queensland — and that some network businesses have been flagged by regulators for unnecessary spending. The piece suggests the industry’s regulated‑returns structure makes it prone to overspending, so the problem is not limited to a single project or state.

In response to public concern about gold plating and energy prices, NSW network providers announced about $2.85 billion of savings and project deferments over the next 18 months, out of an originally earmarked $16.6 billion in spending for the five‑year regulatory period to June 2014.

Yes. If networks build capacity that demand doesn’t justify, customers ultimately pay for that spending through higher regulated charges. The article highlights that rising electricity prices (noted at around a 17% annual increase) have already dampened demand, creating a risk of overcapacity when large projects proceed on dubious demand forecasts.

Local groups like the Manning Alliance argued demand forecasts were dubious for the north‑coast projects. Residents challenged TransGrid and Country Energy proposals — for example, a $227 million line on the far‑north coast — pointing out the region’s low incomes, energy poverty (about 25% of Taree’s rate base on benefits), slow population growth and high average bills that reduce consumption.

The report recommended suspending the contested project and independently reviewing TransGrid’s public consultation process. More broadly, Rollinson and critics argued for independent reviews of major network proposals across the industry to ensure projects are genuinely needed and based on robust demand forecasts.

Investors should monitor signs of regulatory scrutiny, public backlash, announcements of deferred or cut capital projects, and debate over demand forecasts — all of which can change revenue outcomes for regulated network businesses. The article highlights that regulators have already flagged some providers and that announced savings/deferments can materially alter expected spending and returns.