Outcome:	1	Question No:	63	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans New	
Hansard Page ECITA:	94 (28 May)	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Senator BIRMINGHAM—Certainly, Minister. That is fine. What is the maximum period in which to repay the loans?
Senator Wong—As I understand it—and I will check with Mr Carter, Senator—I do not believe that the guidelines for this measure have as yet been released. Is that correct?
Mr Carter—That is correct.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—If you are budgeting $300 million as a subsidy, there must be some budgeting idea of how quickly loans will be repaid as well. Whilst I understand that it goes to the modelling as to what the average period of time to repay those loans may be, knowing what the maximum period of time is would seem to be a fairly fundamental part of the program.
…
Mr Carter—I will have to take that on notice. I do not have those calculations with me.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—You do not have the calculations with you. You do not know what the maximum time frame in which to repay the loans of up to $10,000 is?
Mr Carter—I do not have those calculations with me, Senator. I will have to take that on notice.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—That one is not a calculation. Are you loaning people $10,000 for one year, two years, five years, 10 years, intergenerationally?
Mr Carter—Clearly when we are working through the design and the guidelines of these, which are yet to be submitted to the minister, we would provide a number of options around that. Some of it also depends on the way in which the loans will be provided and negotiations and discussions with delivery providers of them.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—Minister, I understand that there are a lot of technicalities to the department of environment suddenly becoming a small loans bank, but I would have thought the fundamentals of this program were at least how much you are going to loan—you say up to $10,000—how it is going to be repaid and over what time frame it is going to be repaid. There might be a lot of other details to be worked out, but you are telling me that, as yet, the government has no idea to actually over what time frame this funding is going to be repaid?
Senator Wong—Mr Carter may be able to assist you.
Mr Carter—Senator, at the moment we are working on a maximum loan period of up to five years with a subsidy paid up-front to a financial institution. But, as I have indicated, we are still working through the detail of the guidelines and the delivery mechanism at the moment, so we have not come to a final decision or advised the minister on the aspects of that.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—Thank you, Mr Carter. That was a bit harder to get to than it needed to be. I appreciate that it is not locked in concrete but it is five years that you are currently working to as the maximum loan period. What type of interest rate will be applied to the green loans?
Senator Wong—Senator, I think the difficulty we have here is that this is a budget decision and funding has been allocated but the government has not yet released the guidelines for this program, and a great many of these questions do go to guidelines which as yet, as I understand from Mr Carter’s last answer, have not gone to the minister for approval. So it is somewhat difficult for us to indicate what the government’s decision is on that when that decision has not yet been made. So we will endeavour to answer your questions as best we can…

Answers:
The guidelines for the Green Loans program have not been finalised.  The loans, subsidised by the Australian Government to make it more attractive to undertake green renovation actions, will be commercial loans provided through recognised financial institutions 

The Green Loans are commercial loans and the lending institution will consider the ability of the household to repay the loan when contractually agreeing the loan repayment period.  The government subsidy for each household will be provided to the lending institution according to an agreed schedule of support, allowing the lending institution to make a commercial decision about the household’s ability to repay and therefore set the loan repayment period.  The Australian Government financial obligation (household support) is concluded at the commencement of the loan and therefore the actual repayment period of the loan would be a private matter between the household and the lending institution.

The actual interest rate offered to a household will be relative to:

•	the cost of commercial money;
•	the size of the borrowing;
•	the length of time to repayment;
•	the risk profile of the household as determined by the financial institution;
•	the level of security given on the loan; and
•	other commercial factors.

At this early stage of the Green Loans program when negotiations have not been concluded with any financial institution on the level of subsidy provided by the Australian Government and, as described above, the rates charged for a commercial loan are subject to many factors, it is not possible to accurately determine the likely interest rate associated with a loan.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	64	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	100	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Senator BIRMINGHAM—We are not talking about issues that are to be negotiated with the financial providers. We are again getting back to some of the core issues here of the program. Who is going to be eligible is a decision for the government, not a decision for negotiation with financial providers.
Senator Wong—Yes, and Mr Carter has indicated to you that he wants to check and get back to you. I understand that is essentially a request to take the question on notice. He is entitled to do that. I also indicate that I do not have the document here, so we will take that question on notice and provide the committee with an answer on notice.

Answer:
The guidelines for the Green Loans program have not been finalised, but in the public communication of the program the Labor Party on 29 April 2007 indicated that the loans would be available to:
•	“Homeowners who are employed or retired will be able to access the scheme.
•	To ensure fairness, the loans will be limited to households with income of up to $250,000; 
•	Priority will be given to older, un-renovated homes to maximise potential savings”
The Green Loans program includes funding for communications research to identify the cost and other barriers to the take-up of green technologies by households.  This research is expected to influence the design of the program guidelines.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	65	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	101 (28 May)	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Senator BIRMINGHAM—What is your estimate of the cost per household associated with a maximum loan?
Mr Carter—I do not have that number on me. I could take that on notice as to some of the detail.

Answer:
Loans, although subsidised by the Australian Government to make it more attractive to undertake green renovation actions, will be commercial loans provided through recognised financial institutions who agree to be part of the program.  As a commercial loan, the actual cost of a green loan to a household will be relative to:

•	the cost of commercial money;
•	the size of the borrowing;
•	the length of time to repayment;
•	the repayment rate profile (changes to repayment rate throughout the loan);
•	the risk profile of the household as determined by the financial institution;
•	the level of security given on the loan; and
•	other commercial factors.

At this early stage of the Green Loans program when negotiations have not been concluded with any financial institution and, as described above, the costs of a commercial loan are subject to many factors, it is not yet possible to determine the likely costs per household associated with a loan.

All Green Loans through the provision of a Commonwealth subsidy will be more attractive than the equivalent commercial loan before the subsidy.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	66	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	102	

Senator Allison asked:
Senator ALLISON—So if you could only pay $300 a year you would not be entitled to borrow $10,000? Is that what you are saying?
Mr Carter—It is really around the affordability of the loan and not lending households more than they can afford to pay. But I think we would probably need to take that on notice and provide you with some more detail of the case studies.
Senator ALLISON—If you can tell us what a $300 payment per year would buy you by way of the total amount of the loan, that might be useful.

Answers:
The Green Loans are commercial loans and subject to commercial constraints and considerations including a calculation of the ability of the household to repay the loan over the prescribed repayment period.  Households that are assessed by the financial institution through their standard risk assessment processes to only have the ability to repay the minimum amount of $300 per year will be able to borrow an amount commensurate with the loan repayment period that they agree with their financial institution.

It is not possible to state what the total loan amount will be for a repayment of $300 per year without knowing the repayment period, the risk profile of the household, and the amount of security against the loan.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	67	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	102 (28 May)	

Senator Milne asked:
Senator MILNE—In relation to this, what level of gross household income is the basis on which you would make an assumption about households below that level that are not likely to take up the loan? Is there any modelling, any research, any papers of any kind that you have done that will tell you the level below which people will not take up this option?
Mr Carter—I am unaware of that. I would have to take that question on notice.
Senator MILNE—Do you know if there was any research at all done of barriers to the take-up of this loan in terms of gross household income?
Mr Carter—I am unaware of that. I would have to take that on notice and examine it.
Senator MILNE—Because from where we are sitting, it looks like this is a very cobbled together policy that has no policy research backing at all, but I would be very keen to see what you can provide in terms of the modelling, the research—anything behind it. Given the current credit squeeze, given what people are saying about mortgage stress, given the amount of credit people have now racked up on their credit cards, what do you think the likelihood is of working families being able to access these loans?
Mr Carter—I would be speculating and offering an opinion on that, so I could not go there.
Senator MILNE—But surely that is the whole point of this. The press release from the minister says, ‘This is designed for working families.’ Surely you must be able to tell us which working families—the research, the modelling, anything you have done—are going to have a barrier. At what level is that barrier? I find it extraordinary that you cannot tell us that.
Senator Wong—Mr Carter has quite properly said that it is not appropriate for him to offer an opinion to you. You are entitled to your opinion and you can say what you wish to say, either in this forum or in the parliament or on the radio, but he is a public servant. It is not appropriate for him to offer an opinion about the policy.
We have indicated that we would take on notice your question about modelling because Mr Carter is unable to provide any information on that. But I would say this: you may have your own view about this policy design, but this is a measure which is seeking to assist households to improve the energy and water efficiency of their homes. We believe as a government that these sorts of measures, to build on the responsible activities and the responsible behaviour that Australians have already shown when it comes to reducing their impact on the environment, are appropriate things for the government to do. We think this is important. This is also an election commitment that we went to the election with and this budget implements that commitment.

Answer:
The Green Loans program announced in the 2008-09 Budget and funded from 1 July 2008 includes an allocation for audience research to identify the cost and other barriers to the take-up of green technologies by households.  This research is expected to influence the design of the program guidelines.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	68	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	ICED	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	103	

Senator Allison asked:
Could I ask a question about the 15 million tonnes of greenhouse emissions that this is anticipated to save over the scheme’s lifetime. Is it possible to get a breakdown of the assumption behind that?…I am looking at the election platform document which says:
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by up to 15 million tonnes over the scheme’s lifetime. This is equivalent to taking around 4 million cars off the road for a year, or planting more than 15 million trees.
Mr Carter—I would have to take that on notice to see how that was calculated. …
Senator ALLISON—But you must have made some assumptions about how many water tanks and how many PVs and so on.
Mr Carter—There would have been assumptions behind that number and I will take that on notice.

Answers:
The Australian Government has estimated the greenhouse gas emission abatement impact of the program to be 0.6 million tonnes per year by the conclusion of the five year program, with an impact of over 15 million tonnes over the effective life of the expected actions taken by the households.

The range of actions taken by households under the Green Loans program will vary according to the individual house and household circumstance.  Abatement calculations are based on a conservative estimate of actions undertaken by households over the life of the program.  The range of actions considered in the abatement calculations include:

Action	No. of homes	Effective life	Lifetime abatement	
Green Renovation Pack	256,000	various	4.05 Mt	
Insulation - ceiling	120,000	40	7.91 Mt	
Insulation - wall	40,000	40	1.00 Mt	
Draught proofing	80,000	25	1.00 Mt	
Shading/windows	50,000	15	0.38 Mt	
Photovoltaics	50,000	20	1.75 Mt	
Solar hot water	100,000	15	3.24 Mt	
Rainwater tank	50,000	15	0 Mt	
Appliance upgrade	100,000	8	0.86 Mt	
Lighting	100,000	various	0.04 Mt	

The total estimated lifetime abatement of 20.43 Mt includes 5.19 Mt of abatement associated with products eligible for renewable energy certificates or impacted by other policy measures.  The total additional lifetime abatement from this measure is estimated at 15.24 Mt.  The actual abatement will be determined by the renovation actions selected by participating households.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	69	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	103	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Senator BIRMINGHAM—You have appropriated funds across five years. You have got a target of 200,000 households across five years. I would have thought that, to get to that 200,000 households across five years, with funds appropriated across each of those years, there might be some breakdown of targets per annum.
Mr Carter—I would have to take that on notice and provide that to you.

Answer/s:
The Green Loans program is designed to deliver household sustainability assessments and Green Renovation Packs to 270,000 households, of whom it is anticipated 200,000 households will decide to take further action through a green loan.  The target number of loans per financial year is:

•	2008/09	9,000 
•	2009/10	40,000
•	2010/11	60,000
•	2011/12	60,000
•	2012/13	31,000 (loans finish March 2013 to allow final program reporting)

Outcome:	1	Question No:	70	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	104	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Will you look into whether there is any research to justify the particular $250,000 figure?
Senator Wong—I am happy to do that…

Answer/s:
The $250,000 means test was an election announcement and the Department is not aware of research on that specific issue.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	71	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	106	

Senator Johnston asked:
Senator JOHNSTON—It is an election policy from the ALP, but does it have any greater genesis than that? Is there a model somewhere around the world or is anyone else doing this?
Mr Carter—I am unaware of that. I can take that on notice and provide advice on it.

Answer/s:
The Australian Government is aware of many international household sustainability assessment initiatives that are linked to a schedule of financial incentives for households to take action to reduce their greenhouse gas emission impact.  For example, the New Zealand Government has recently announced a small Green Loans package.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	72	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	106	

Senator Ian MacDonald asked:
Senator IAN MACDONALD—On a personal loan, unsecured, the interest rate would be about 15 per cent commercially. The government is promoting this as a low interest rate, which I think I read somewhere was 2½ per cent. That means the Commonwealth is going to be subsidising the commercial lender to a figure of 13-odd per cent. Is that how it will work?
Mr Carter—I think that is something that is really subject to the negotiations with financial institutions.
Senator IAN MACDONALD—The financial institution will not be lending at less than 15 per cent unsecured.
Mr Carter—I do not have an answer to that. I will have to take that on notice.

Answer/s:
The loans, although subsidised by the Australian Government to make it more attractive to undertake green renovation actions, will be commercial loans provided through recognised financial institutions who agree to be part of the program.  

At this early stage of the Green Loans program when negotiations have not been concluded with any financial institution and, because, the rates charged for a commercial loan are subject to many factors, it is not yet possible to determine the likely interest rate associated with a loan.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	73	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	ICED	
Topic:	Green Loans	
Hansard Page ECITA:	108	

Senator Birmingham asked:
Yes, Chair. Minister, what advice has Treasury provided in regard to the costing of this policy?
Senator Wong—I will have to take that on notice.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—Have concerns been expressed within government that the 200,000 commitment in your policy, which has now been shifted to ‘up to 200,000’, is unachievable?
Senator Wong—First, the phrasing I read out was from a budget document, so I want to be clear that we have been very up-front about that.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—The phrase that I read out was from a Labor Party policy document.
Senator Wong—Senator Macdonald, you may laugh—
Senator IAN MACDONALD—Who is laughing?
Senator Wong—but it might be helpful if you actually read the document.
Senator IAN MACDONALD—This is a policy and you do not know what it says.
Senator Wong—In terms of the question as to other departments’ inputs, I would say two things. First, I will take that on notice. Obviously I cannot speak for other departments or other portfolios.
Senator IAN MACDONALD—But you can speak for the Labor Party.
Senator Wong—Second, I would make the point that obviously these matters were considered in the budget process. There has been a budget decision made and the budget has been announced. We have gone through, in quite considerable detail, the work that is being done on this commitment. Madam Chair, we are happy to sit here and answer questions all night about this, if that is what the committee really wants, but I am not sure we can provide much further information.

Answer/s:
The Treasury and the Department of Finance and Deregulation agreed the costings for this program in the context of the development of the 2008/09 budget.  The Department is not aware of any concerns being expressed within Government on this policy commitment.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	74	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Green Loans/Solar Homes and Communities Plan	
Hansard Page ECITA:	111	

Senator Milne asked:
Senator MILNE—Can I take you to the Alternative Technology Association survey that you have just mentioned. What did it say about the household income at which people take up this rebate?
Mr Carter—I do not have that information on hand. I will have to take on notice what that report indicated.
	
Answer/s:
The “PV System Owner’s Survey” was undertaken by the Alternative Technology Association regarding solar rebates in October 2007, the results are:

•	Eighty five per cent of all respondents stated they had net household incomes less than or equal to $100,000.
•	Fifteen per cent of all respondents stated they had net household incomes greater than $100,000.
•	Twenty five per cent of all respondents stated they had net household incomes less than $30,000.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	75	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/Solar Homes and Communities Plan	
Hansard Page ECITA:	115	

Senator Ian Macdonald asked:
Senator IAN MACDONALD—Someone must have done the figure which was the subject of Senator Birmingham’s question. If it was not capped, what was your projection of what it would have got to? You must have had some estimate of it.
Mr Borthwick—Mr Carter indicated the level it was running at. We would have to go back and take that on notice, but it would have well exceeded the amount of money that parliament would have appropriated.

Answer:

The Budget allocation for the program was for 3,000 household rebates per year over five years, that is approximately 60 per week.  Any application rate above this number would see the end date of the program brought forward, as the budget measure was for approximately 15,000 household installations.

Applications significantly exceeded this ‘average’ for a period of time before the Budget, which is the reason for the bring forward of expenditure. 

Outcome:	1	Question No:	76	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/Solar Homes and Communities Plan 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	117	

Senator Birmingham asked: 

Senator BIRMINGHAM—Does the government still meet with the PV Directorate?
Mr Carter—My understanding is that the staff in that area do continue to meet with the PV Directorate. I do not know when the last meeting was. I can provide that on notice.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—So there has been no official communication with the PV Directorate or the government’s usual communication channels either before or indeed even since this announcement?
Mr Carter—Not to this point but I will take on notice when the next meeting of the PV Directorate is.
…
Senator Wong—Mr Carter can answer in terms of the department. Regarding Mr Garrett’s office, I would have to take on notice what meetings have or have not occurred or are intended to occur.

Answers:
Yes, the Department does still meet with the PV Directorate. 

Since the Budget the Department was involved in the 15 June 2008 PV Directorate meeting.  The manager of the National Solar Schools Program attended in person and three staff were on conference call.  These staff were representing the other solar rebate programs: Solar Homes and Communities Plan and the Renewable Remote Power Generation Program.

PV Directorate and Solar Water Heater Directorate meetings occur approximately three times per year – no fixed dates.

The Minister has not meet with the PV Directorate.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	77	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/ Solar Homes and Communities Plan 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	120	

Senator Allison asked: 

Mr Carter—… I can take on notice that you would like to see the full dataset of both applications and installations over that period so that you can examine that data…
…
Senator ALLISON—Can you give us month-by-month figures that show the application rates and, alongside those, the installation rates, so that we can get a picture of the trends for both?
…Senator Wong—So you want the data from July till the budget?
Senator ALLISON—Yes.

Answers:
The Tables below provides figures on application rates and installation rates per month.  Note: under Photovoltaic Rebate Program guidelines applicants were given six months to allow for the installation.

July 2007-June 2008
Month	July 07 	Aug 07	Sept 07	Oct 07	Nov 07	Dec 07 	Jan
08	Feb 08	Mar 08	Apr 08	May 08	June 08	
App’s Rec’d per Month	140	543	588	751	702	518	893	872	909	1,354	1,899	2325	
Install’n Reports Rec’d per Month	N/a	12	92	212	303	284	412	447	660	626	768	919	

Outcome:	1	Question No:	78	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Homes and Communities Plan	
Hansard Page ECITA:	121	

Senator ALLISON asked: 

Senator ALLISON—Mr Carter, what do you understand to be the megawatt capacity of solar PV units today, or whenever you have the most recent figures?
Mr Carter—I do not think I have that figure with me.
Senator ALLISON—Fifty-eight or 60 wouldn’t be too far off the mark, would it?
Mr Carter—I would have to get that figure for you. I do not have it.

Answer/s:

The total capacity of installed photovoltaic systems in Australia was about 82.5 MW at the end of 2007 (UNSW 2008). 

Outcome:	1	Question No:	79	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/Solar Homes and Communities Plan 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	122	

Senator Allison asked: 

(a) Senator ALLISON—To be clear, by the end of this measure, which is 2012, do we have a figure on what, as part of this measure, this will deliver by way of megawatt capacity?
Mr Carter—I do not think I have the estimate of capacity in megawatt terms with me. I will have to get that for you.

(b) Senator ALLISON—Have you had a chance to compare Australia’s megawatt capacity with some of the other countries around the world that regard solar PV units as a significant subset of their renewable energy targets?
Mr Carter—I have not done that comparison. I am sure that there is data available on what the comparison is with other countries.
Senator ALLISON—You do not know where Australia rates per capita or as a country overall in terms of capacity?

Answers:
(a) We estimate that approximately 25.5 MW (comprising around 21 MW of household systems and 4.5 MW of community systems) will be installed under the Solar Homes and Communities Plan.

(b) Below is a comparison of Australia with some other example countries. Table 1 comprises a full list of countries who are members of the International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (Report IEA-PVPS T1-16:2007) (IEA,2007).

Of the 20 member countries reporting, Australia is fifth in terms of cumulative installed PV power and fourth in watts/capita.

Country            PV Watts per Capita            Total PV Capacity
                                                                             2006 (MW)          	
	
Australia:                    3.5                                        70.3 	
	
Germany                    34.9                                      2,863.0 	
	
Japan                         13.4                                      1,708.5 	
	
Great Britain               0.2                                        14.0 	
	
USA                            2.1                                      624.0 	
	
Norway                       1.7                                        7.7 	
	
Mexico                        0.2                                       19.7 	

Extract from International Energy Agency report.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	80	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/ Solar Homes and Communities Plan 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	123	

Senator ALLISON asked:

Senator ALLISON—…We do not know yet what the actual drop-off will be, but do you have a figure beyond which you will say it is time to review and change the threshold? For instance, if we are running at 500 a month and that is the norm, if it comes back to 200 will you then revisit the question of the threshold?
Senator Wong—All I can go back to, and I am happy to take it on notice, is that I understand that the Prime Minister has stated that the government will closely monitor the demand for this program. I am not aware, nor are the officers at the table, of any further announcement on the details of that by the government.
…Senator ALLISON—The purpose of the monitoring?
Senator Wong—I do not have anything further I can add on this, Senator Allison. I can take it on notice…

Answer/s:

The purpose of the monitoring is to determine the demand for the rebate and provide Government with timely advice in this regard.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	81	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar Cities/Solar Homes and Communities Plan 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	127	

Senator Macdonald asked:

(a) Senator IAN MACDONALD—Minister, I do not expect you to have this at present but on notice can you assess for me, on the number of solar panel installations that were projected—Mr Carter gave us evidence of some figures I think over the last three months and some projected figures which you projected through to make your government believe you could not afford it—the amount of carbon that would have been saved if all of those people who were projected to have applied for this rebate had achieved it and installed the solar panel? What I am trying to get, just in case I am not being clear—
…
Senator IAN MACDONALD—What I am trying to get to is the amount of carbon emissions that could have been saved for the government had this measure not been introduced.
Senator Wong—I will take that on notice. What you are asking is evidence of a policy decision not taken, so I am not sure to what extent you could be assisted. I am not sure to what extent there would be information that essentially models a policy decision that was not taken. I would have thought that would be difficult. I would make the point again that this measure under the budget brings forward expenditure from a five-year
profile to a three-year profile, so the total number of rebates remains the same but the rate of take-up is quicker than was previously budgeted for—yes, means-tested—so logically one would assume that if you have the same number of rebates then you are going to have the same abatement outcome.

(b) Senator IAN MACDONALD—Minister, if you are not prepared to do it, we can do it ourselves, as long as you can give us the technical advice on what a solar panel would, on average, save in electricity and therefore greenhouse gas emissions. 
…
Senator IAN MACDONALD—Minister, can you get me those details on notice? I can read Mr Carter’s forward assessments.
Senator Wong—Which forward assessments are you referring to?
Senator IAN MACDONALD—I have those. Don’t worry about those! What I am asking you for now is an assessment of what a solar panel, on average, would save in greenhouse gas emissions. I know you have that sort of detail available.
Senator Wong—We will take that on notice and will provide it if we are able to…
Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am talking about an average solar panel, the sort that you have been giving the subsidies for. If you can just give me the figure of what that would in, say, a year save in greenhouse gas or carbon emissions…
Senator Wong—I understand from Mr Carter we can provide that on notice.
Senator IAN MACDONALD—Thank you very much. Mr Carter, could you take it one step further and, using the figures you have already given us, give us a combined table on where it might have got to?

Answers:
(a) As stated by the Minister the number of rebates and the total budget has not changed, it has been compressed from a five year program to a three year program. The rebates are expected to be fully subscribed. The total amount of carbon emissions projected for the program has not changed but will be achieved earlier than originally planned due to the more rapid installation rates.

(b) An average 1kW (household) system could save 1400 kW per annum, which would equate to 28 tonnes of CO2 emissions over the 20 year life of the system.  Based on an average saving of 1.4 tonnes per year, per system (Business Council for Sustainable Energy: average daily production figures - Electricity from the Sun publication).

Outcome:	1	Question No:	82	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Hot Water Rebate	
Hansard Page ECITA:	128	

Senator Milne asked:

Senator Milne–   ‘Why is it that the hot water rebate only applies to new systems and does not apply to a retrofit with evacuated tubes which gives you that high level of efficiency?’ I would like to know whether it has been an oversight in the application of that and whether you are prepared to review the rebate on the basis that, in a cold climate, an evacuated tube does give you a higher level of efficiency?
Mr Carter–…But I might take that on notice because it is clearly an issue that we would like to explore further.

Answer:
Evacuated tube water heaters are eligible for the solar hot water rebate as long as they are eligible for at least 20 Renewable Energy Certificates.  

The Australian Government Solar Hot Water Rebate Program provides rebates for solar and heat pump hot water systems that replace an existing electric storage hot water system.  In order to be eligible for the rebate the solar or heat pump system must be a new and complete hot water system that is eligible for at least 20 Renewable Energy Certificates.

Renewable Energy Certificates are assigned by the Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator as part of the Renewable Energy Target scheme and reflect the deemed value of equivalent renewable energy generation over a ten year period. 

The Renewable Energy Target scheme does not allow individual parts of hot water systems to be tested separately because the efficiency of the total system can vary greatly with the effects of different ancillary parts and their installed arrangement, as a result solar water heaters that are currently eligible for Renewable Energy Certificates are complete systems. For this reason, a ‘retrofit’ system that is based around a previously installed component is not currently eligible for Renewable Energy Certificates and therefore not eligible for the Solar Hot Water Rebate Program.

This is an issue we will be considering in a review of the program planned for later in 2008.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	83	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Industry, Community and Energy Division	
Topic:	Solar industry - compensation 	
Hansard Page ECITA:	137	

Senator Birmingham asked:

Senator BIRMINGHAM—…Minister, in the discussions that Minister Garrett has had with the industry, has the issue of compensation been raised?
Senator Wong—I would have to take that question on notice.
Senator BIRMINGHAM—Were there any departmental officials present with the minister when he met with industry?
Senator Wong—I do not know whether there were…I will have to take that on notice.

Answer/s:
At the time of Senate Estimates the Minister had not met with industry representatives to discuss the program.

Outcome:	1	Question No:	87	
Output:	1.1	
Division/Agency:	Natural Resource Management Programs Division	
Topic:	Green Vouchers for Schools - Applications	
Hansard Page ECITA:	17	

Senator Birmingham asked:
How many were budgeted for this financial year?

Answer/s:
$8.999m was allocated to the Green Vouchers for Schools program for the 2007/2008 financial year.  This was fully expended by 30 June 2008 resulting in 224 Green Vouchers for Schools projects funded.