A Fancy Hypocrisy: China, Australia and Coal Mania
Fear them for
their technology; fear them for their ideology and their
authoritarianism. But embrace interference and involvement in the
economy if it involves coal. This is the fancy hypocrisy of Australian
politics, one driven to lunacy and inconsistency by that dark and dirty
love.
The contrast
between a fear of Huawei, on the one hand, and an eager opening for a
Chinese state-owned enterprise barging its way into the Australian
market suggests that those in Canberra have
finally twisted themselves
into knots. The latter is particularly striking – the China Energy
Engineering Corporation (CEEC), the designated monster behind what
promises to be 2000 megawatt of coal generation in the Hunter Valley
north of Sydney. Two plants billed as users of efficient coal-fired
technology will supposedly take root in the “failed industrial zone” and
give it life. The cost would be in the order of $8 billion and
generate over $17 billion worth of carbon liabilities.
Australia’s dinosaur political class is delighted at the latest foray into environmental spoliation.
“This is exactly what the market needs,” chuffed Coalition backbencher Craig Kelly.
Furthermore, to
show that the conservative wing of politics is happy to forfeit any
laissez faire credentials regarding the economy when needed, Kelly is
keen for generous taxpayers’ support.
“If the Government needs to underwrite it, if it needs a little help, then that’s what we should be doing.”
Gone from the
conversational babble was China’s February announcement through the
Dalian Port authorities restricting Australian coal imports.
“The goals are to better safeguard the legal rights and interests of Chinese importers and to protect the environment,” explained Geng Shuang of the Chinese foreign ministry.
The point is worth
reiterating, since similar bans were not applied to the coal from other
states. The indefinite ban was the bitter icing on that particular
issue, confirming prolonged clearing times for Australian coal since the
start of February.
The announcement of
the mining venture had its predictable reaction in the environmental
movement in Australia. The Greens federal member for Melbourne was
aghast and, as is his wont, got into the realms of hyperbole. Protests
would ensue; mass disaffection would take to the streets. These latest
coal plans, according to Adam Bandt, “will make the Franklin Dam
campaign look like a Sunday picnic.” What of, he said, any
acknowledgment of the recent climate shocks gripping the continent?
“We just had our hottest summer on record. If Labor and Liberal [parties] give this project the tick of approval then you will see civil disobedience in Australia on a scale never seen before.”
Interference by
China in Australian matters is enchanting printing presses and stalking
the corridors of power in Canberra. Like other obsessions, it is clear
that this one is inconsistent and variable, manifesting in various forms
like an inconsistent fever. James Laurenceson’s Do the Claims Stack Up, Australia Talks China, concludes that
“in each case, the evidence base [on interference] is shown to be divorced from the claims found in headlines, news reports and opinion pieces, revealing just how widespread has become the discourse of the China Threat, China Angst and China Panic”.
When it comes to
coal, the threat transforms; China Blessing, or China Grovelling come to
the fore. (The Yellow Peril becomes the Yellow Salvation.)
The divorce in
terms of reality is also evident in the finance side of things; the
mining projects being proposed have yet to find the necessary capital, a
point that is proving increasingly difficult for any such concerns.
Kaisun Holdings, the other company involved in the enterprise and also
noted for being a “Belt and Road” company, is still on the hunt for
“potential investors”. As with the Indian mining giant Adani, such
companies will have to convince those who finance them that coal is good
in an increasingly hostile environment. No money, no project; the
equation is uncomplicated. On paper, Kaisun has a market capitalisation
of $33 million. The Australian joint-venture partner, has a mere
$25,000 on paper.
The Australian Financial Review has also pointed
out that the scheme, inspired by Parramatta’s Frank Cavasinni, is being
“driven by a small businessman from Western Sydney with no experience
in the energy industry.” Ignorance can be golden, but not in certain
areas of economic planning. Such a plant has already received reproach
from EnergyAustralia’s executive Mark Collette, who claims
that the plant will not provide the flexible capacity in the grid
required as users move to the use of low-cost wind and solar power.
“Coal as an investment works best as baseload but the market signal is
calling for something different, which is flexible capacity.”
Australian
politicians, when it comes to mining, prove fickle. Their views are
changeable, climactically variable and their principles are always up
for purchase. They are in office to be bought by the commodities
industry, but the New South Wales premier, Gladys Berejiklian, is firm: there are no plans in the pipeline to approve any coal-fired power stations.
“We are the most resilient state when it comes to our own energy needs.”
But given that the
Australian federal government lacks a coherent, sustainable energy
policy, coal lovers feel they are still in with a chance.
*
Note to readers: please click the share
buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on
your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark
was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures
at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global
Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
Featured image is from Asianews
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Dr. Binoy Kampmark, Global Research, 2019
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
No comments:
Post a Comment