So here is some of the perspective:
When industry and States were dissatisfied with the federal response to their growing concerns, and the South Australian "blackout",
an extraordinary meeting was convened in October 2016 by Coalition of Australian Governments (COAG) Energy Ministers. They agreed to an independent review of the national electricity market, and it was Chaired by Professor Alan Finkel.
Finkel
presented his
Blueprint for the Future Security of the National Electricity Marketin June 2017.
Finkel set out the energy future and made
this assessment:
"Australia needs to increase system security and ensure future reliability in the NEM. Security and reliability have been compromised by poorly integrated variable renewable electricity generators, including wind and solar. This has coincided with the unplanned withdrawal of older coal and gas-fired generators. Security should be strengthened through Security Obligations for new generators, including regionally determined minimum system inertia levels. Similarly, reliability should be reinforced through a Generator Reliability Obligation implemented by the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) following improved regional reliability assessments. These obligations will require new generators to ensure that they can supply electricity when needed for the duration and capacity determined for each NEM region.
The reliability of Australia’s future electricity system will be underpinned by an orderly transition that integrates energy and emissions reduction policy. All governments need to agree to an emissions reduction trajectory to give the electricity sector clarity about how we will meet our international commitments. This requires a credible and durable mechanism for driving clean energy investments to support a reliable electricity supply. Governments need to agree on and implement a mechanism as soon as possible. Ongoing uncertainty is undermining investor confidence, which in turn undermines the reliable supply of electricity and increases costs to consumers."
You don't have to be Einstein to work out that little of his blueprint came to fruition, just as
Finkel's plans for a hydrogen future were put on a go slow process.
Without a policy that supports what should happen, it won't!
"Nothing" in this case is the practical outcome.
You can talk about anything extraneous you like, but there is a very simple bottom line. The levers that needed to be pulled when we were given a
Blueprint for action, were not.
Industry had the money necessary to move us into our energy future, so the government did not have to "throw" any, as you suggest. I can only repeat that all this is a matter of public record.
Either you don't understand some of my points or you don't read what I write. On EVs for example I have consistently said that incentives are not well targeted, and made many suggestions about how less well off people could to buy them. In fact I even suggested that incentives could be applied to vehicles at such low price points that none presently sit there. I understand the need for better EV infrastructure is a concern but both federal and State governments have already committed monies. That's apart from the rollout being actively pursued by the private sector. This is another case of to little too late for early adopters, and no practical policy nor adequate funding for "blackspots".
I am clearly critical of the Coalition, but my posts often explain why and have an alternative to inaction or poor policy. As
@Smurf1976 notes, Labor so far seems to be making the right moves. However, we might need to buy a very expensive band aid and hope it lasts long enough to see us into the inevitable transition to a renewables future with appropriate dispatchable storage backup (which I hope by 2030 will be hydrogen).