<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sekisui-house-australia">Sekisui House Australia</a> recently welcomed residents into Uno and Duo, marking the completion of the penultimate stage of its $1.2 billion West Village precinct in Brisbane's West End.

There are only two opportunities remaining in the two-tower stage known as The Allere Collection. Duo is fully sold out, but two penthouses have just been released in the sister tower Uno.

The sprawling penthouses, measuring upward of nearly 350 sqm, have been designed by renowned architecture firm Rothelowman to focus on multi-generational living. One penthouse has four bedrooms, the other five, as well as several living areas. A second entry to the apartments make them ideal for those with several generations living under one roof, allowing for greater independence and flexibility within the same home, an increasingly sought-after feature among extended families looking to remain connected without compromising privacy.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=114215 project_image_fid=5703]

Built by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/hutchinson-builders">Hutchinson Builders</a>, one of the best in the construction game, Duo forms part of a connected, pet-friendly vertical community that brings together two architecturally aligned towers with shared rooftop amenity.

Rothelowman Principal Jeff Brown previously described the design philosophy as centred on connection.

“When thinking of ways to nourish a soul one needs connection to self, to nature and to community,” Brown said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=114215 project_image_fid=204874]

That ethos is expressed through Duo’s rooftop offering, which includes a pool and heated spa framed by mature planting, a private dining room and residents’ lounge, and BBQ facilities. On the lower levels, residents have access to&nbsp;work-from-home spaces, a workshop, and a pet parlour.

The rooftop captures views across the Brisbane River and back toward the city skyline, positioning it as both a retreat and a social anchor for residents.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=114215 project_image_fid=364091]

Owners in Duo also have access to Uno’s rooftop amenities, effectively doubling the shared facilities within the community. At Uno, residents can use a second rooftop pool, additional private dining and entertaining areas, a teppanyaki grill, and the Paw Pavilion, an off-leash space designed for residents’ dogs. The reciprocal access reinforces the project’s “vertical neighbourhood” model, where common areas are intended to extend the footprint of each apartment.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=114215 project_image_fid=5710]

The Allere Collection sits within West Village, a 2.6-hectare mixed-use precinct just 800 metres from the Brisbane CBD. Delivered progressively since 2016 on the former Peters Ice Cream factory site, the masterplan now integrates heritage buildings, retail and dining, health and wellness providers, and open green space into an established inner-west address.

Sekisui has released the final stage of the development, Callista on Park, set to be completed in Q2 next year. With the first release now 95 per cent sold out, limited large-scale three- and four-bedroom residences remain, priced from $2.6 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=114215]

Joel Robinson

Allere Collection residents move in as multi-award winning West Village enters its final chapter

Construction is underway at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/yarraville-green-42-stephen-street-yarraville-vic-3013">Yarraville Green</a>, the boutique residential development by <a>Excelon Projects</a> on Stephen Street in Yarraville, following the appointment of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/balmain-co">Balmain &amp; Co</a> as builder.

The milestone marks a significant step forward for the 53-residence project, designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/six-degrees-architects">Six Degrees Architects</a> with landscape architecture by Simone Bliss Landscape Architects, conceived around a strong focus on community, craftsmanship and connection to nature.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/excelon-projects">Excelon Projects</a>’ vision brings together 41 one, two and three-bedroom apartments and 12 townhomes arranged around a central landscaped garden, prioritising liveability in a low-rise, low-density format.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297728]

Open-air corridors, a light-filled lobby and generous setbacks are intended to enhance day-to-day comfort while reinforcing the development’s community-oriented design approach.

Car parking has been located underground to prioritise shared green space and pedestrian movement through the site, allowing the landscaped garden to form the central organising element of the development.

Interiors incorporate custom pieces by Melbourne makers including leadlight pendants by Adadaz, hand-turned timber door handles by Auburn Woodturning, and blown-glass lighting by Ruth Allen, embedding a layer of local craftsmanship throughout the homes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297736]

Sustainability has also informed the design approach, with Yarraville Green targeting an average 7-star NatHERS energy rating. Passive design measures such as cross-ventilation and thermal mass aim to reduce reliance on mechanical heating and cooling, while rooftop solar panels will supply power to common areas and harvested rainwater will be reused for landscape irrigation.

Positioned along the quiet, tree-lined Stephen Street, Yarraville Green sits between Yarraville and Seddon villages, placing residents within walking distance of cafés, dining, boutique retail and the Sun Theatre.

Seddon Station is also a short walk away, ideal for residents seeking an inner-west address with strong amenity and transport connections.

Completion of Yarraville Green is anticipated in 2027.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=144913]

Balmain & Co appointed builder as construction begins at Excelon Projects’ Yarraville Green

A long-stalled Mermaid Beach development site opposite Pacific Fair, previously earmarked for a twin-tower project, is set for a fresh development push with plans for a major mixed-use residential tower.&nbsp;

Billionaire garbo Ian Malouf's development company, REMI Residences, is proposing Project Elegance, a 44-storey tower with over 270 residential apartments and 88 short-term accomodation units at&nbsp;2065 Gold Coast Highway, Mermaid Beach, on the corner of Mermaid Avenue.

Malouf paid $23.76 million for the 3,783 sqm site in 2022, six years after it traded for $34.1 million when it was bought by Hubei United Investment Group.

 
<img alt="First Look: REMI Developments plans major mixed-use tower with 360 apartments at stalled Mermaid Beach site" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" data-widget="image" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Mermaid%20Beach%20da%20podium.png?VersionId=yRYSSPItvCA5ZeQ49LlwkQYVn7OhEqIC" /><img alt="" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" draggable="true" height="15" role="presentation" src="" title="Click and drag to move" width="15" />

&nbsp;

The design statement by DKO says Project Elegance "represents a holistic response to its coastal and urban context. It draws upon site, climate, and landscape to create a composed architectural outcome that prioritises occupant experience, public interface, and long-term viability via vibrant and active uses."

They say the subject site&nbsp;occupies a distinctive island parcel with three street frontages and prominent visual exposure to passing visitors.

"This unique position allows the development to form a panoramic dialogue with water and city, setting the foundation for a climate-responsive, site-specific architectural expression.&nbsp;The podium base, inspired by the region’s sandstone headlands and coastal setting, and adopts a sculpted and grounded character that provides a stable counterpoint to the slender tower above."

&nbsp;

<img alt="First Look: REMI Developments plans major mixed-use tower with 360 apartments at stalled Mermaid Beach site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="4f088e10-6493-49d4-83cd-10fc039318ac" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Mermaid%20Beach%20da%20tower.png?VersionId=Sbglj0tNBqyvY5V_DlVH.bvjXi8kBbfl" />

Residents and guests would have access to multiple communal recreation levels. Plans include a shared recreation deck on level six, with a pool and three padel courts. There will be a residential-only pool on level seven, and an upper-level communal space only accessible by those buyers towards the top of the tower.

&nbsp;

Ground-floor commercial spaces are proposed to operate between 5am and midnight, contributing to an activated street frontage along the busy Gold Coast Highway corridor.

The site sits within the High Density Residential zone and a Light Rail Urban Renewal Area, where planning policy encourages higher-density development close to transport infrastructure and services. The planning report states the project aims to “ensure the efficient reuse of this centrally located property” and support the transformation of inner-city areas into “more vibrant, compact, interesting, connected and active” precincts.

&nbsp;

The proposal marks the latest attempt to unlock the high-profile parcel, which previously carried approval for the “Elegance” twin-tower development, a project that included more than 500 apartments but ultimately stalled after sales activity ceased in 2019.

REMI Developments has been increasingly active in the Gold Coast property market, with the Malouf-led group positioning itself around premium residential and lifestyle-focused projects as the region continues to attract both interstate buyers and international interest.

Malouf is one of Australia's most impressive entrepreneurs, having sold his waste business fore more than $500 million, having started only with a small truck at 18 years old.

First Look: Billionaire Ian Malouf plans Mermaid Beach tower

A State Significant Development proposal from Ecove Group could see two high-rise residential towers developed above an ALDI-anchored retail podium in Gordon.

The 28-storey towers, dubbed Eight 10, would become the tallest in the sleepy Upper North Shore suburb, which has been stirred by changes to the Low to Mid-Rise Housing Policy aimed at triggering greater density around transport hubs.

Ecove Group’s plans for 810 Pacific Highway, a 2,357 sqm site around 400 metres from Gordon railway station, include 180 apartments, 39 of which would be dedicated as affordable housing.

Architecture firm PBD said in its Design Report the site "presents an exciting opportunity to positively contributes to the surrounding context, enhances the overall urban experience."

<img alt="First Look: Ecove lodges State Significant Development plans for dual-tower “Eight 10” project at 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="e50141fa-fb0b-44b3-bf9b-c6d87b993c3b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Eight%2010%20podium.png?VersionId=YTgQPBxNnmQwr6x2AJSpVZ1COqa.9oLQ" />

The site previously received approval for a development comprising 56 apartments above retail in 2018.

PBD noted in its report that the planning&nbsp;context for the site has "evolved significantly since the original consent was issued."

In April 2024, the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) identified the site as being located within a Transport Oriented Development (TOD) precinct. In parallel, Ku-ring-gai Council progressed a preferred planning framework for Gordon Town Centre, including proposed amendments to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP 2015).

<img alt="First Look: Ecove lodges State Significant Development plans for dual-tower “Eight 10” project at 810 Pacific Highway, Gordon" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="cf65fb26-a163-41ea-a4d3-8ddbeabd67e4" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Eight%2010%20MAP.png?VersionId=vrQJzXSg3xRH.APBmtth5mA2adPmUPjc" />

PBD said the proposed development "responds to the amended KLEP 2015 and, in addition, seeks to utilise the floor space ratio and height incentives available under Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 1 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021."

Late last year the first project in Gordon through the NSW Government's Housing Delivery Authority was approved. That was for 106 apartments across two connected seven to eight-storey buildings.

Ecove plans 28-storey apartment towers in Gordon

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/graya">Graya</a> has set its sights on one of Brisbane’s scarce remaining riverfront development opportunities.

They have spent $17 million on an 810 sqm site across 16-18 Sandford Street, where it is planning SILK, a 15-storey apartment tower with just 22 apartments.

Planning documents outline a single tower designed to take advantage of the site’s northerly outlook toward the river and Brisbane CBD.

There will be eight two-bedrooms and 14 three-bedroom apartments on offer, each either half- or full-floor.

<img alt="Graya" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="059e1aa4-695c-4556-bafa-e8b5970c06f5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-03-12%20at%203.07.50%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=tEqwv_m8HYhrXSCStOMFHvGZZ5WgKfEx" />

&nbsp;

According to the Town Planning Assessment, the proposal "showcases a high quality architectural and landscape design outcome that is enhanced by the amenity of the Brisbane River… and provides a subtropical design response that celebrates Brisbane’s climate and lifestyle.”

Ground level includes landscaped communal areas facing the river alongside a gym and outdoor garden space, while the rooftop terrace will feature multiple leisure amenities like swimming pools,&nbsp;dining and barbecue facilities, as well as outdoor relaxation and yoga spaces.

<img alt="Graya" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="93982dbb-9f27-409b-a319-bd6f458f9ea7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-03-12%20at%203.09.05%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=gCaaW82pEBxMvXkVkEm4TC_o7_UXA82p" />

Architecturally, the tower form draws inspiration from the movement of water along the river edge. Design documentation describes the building as “a form sculpted by flow, shaped by shifting water,” with curved forms, varied materiality, and sculptural elements used to soften the building’s visual bulk. Sandstone, an iconic material throughout St Lucia, is reinterpreted through a mix of refined and split-face textures across the façade.

The Sandford Street frontage is intended to present an articulated façade featuring vertical landscaping and sculptural architectural elements, helping the tower integrate with the evolving high-density character of the riverfront strip while maintaining visual interest from both the street and river corridor.

Graya has continued to expands its footprint across South East Queensland, with projects under construction across both Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

GRAYA unveils plans for SILK in St Lucia

Energy Cost

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The <a href="https://theconversation.com/power-bills-can-fall-but-the-main-attention-must-be-on-affordability-accc-85734" target="_blank">preliminary report on energy prices</a> released last week by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) suggests that the consumer watchdog is concerned about almost every aspect of Australia’s electricity industry. It quotes customer groups who say electricity is the biggest issue in their surveys, and cites several case studies of outrageous price increases experienced by various customers.
The report is long on sympathy about the plight of Australia’s electricity users. But the true picture is even worse – in reality, the ACCC’s assessment of Australia’s energy prices compared to the rest of the world is absurdly rosy.
Australia has internationally high energy prices
The ACCC quotes studies from the Electricity Supply Association and the <a href="https://studylib.net/doc/6673393/category-analysis-rin---australian-energy-regulator" target="_blank">Australian Energy Markets Commission</a> (AEMC) to compare electricity prices in Australia with those in other OECD countries. But the ACCC’s comparison is based on two-year-old data, and badly underestimates the actual prices consumers are paying.
The AEMC’s analysis assumes all customers are on their retailer’s cheapest available offer. This is an obviously implausible assumption, and gives a favourable impression of the price that customers are paying.
As <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-household-electricity-prices-may-be-25-higher-than-official-reports-84681" target="_blank">previously pointed out on The Conversation</a>, the Thwaites review – which looked at customers’ actual bills – found that in February 2017 Victorians were typically paying A35c per kilowatt hour (kWh) – 42% more than the AEMC’s estimate. What’s more, we know that Victoria’s electricity prices are lower on average than those in South Australia, Queensland and New South Wales, and hence below the Australian average.
A part of this 42% gap – around 15% – is explained by the latest price increases that are not included in the ACCC’s comparison. But this still leaves a 27% gap between what the AEMC assumes and the evidence of actual prices.
This begs the question: why did the ACCC not recognise the widely known flaw in the AEMC’s analysis?
<h2>The real problem is overbuilt network infrastructure</h2>
The report estimates that rising network charges account for more of the price increase than all other factors put together. There is no doubt that network charges are a real problem at least in parts of Australia, although their significance relative to retailers’ costs is contested territory.
But why would distributors build far more network infrastructure than they need? And why have government-owned distributors built far more infrastructure than private ones, despite having no more demand?
The answer to this perplexing question is to be found in part in Australia’s “competitive neutrality” policy. This is Orwellian doublespeak for an approach that is neither neutral nor competitive.
Under this policy, government-owned distributors are regulated as if they are privately financed. This means that when setting regulated prices, the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) allows government distributors to charge their captive consumers for a return on their regulated assets, at the same level as if they were privately financed. That is despite the fact that private financing is much more expensive than government funding.
It’s no surprise that when offered a rate of return that far exceeds the actual cost of finance, government distributors have a powerful incentive to expand their infrastructure for a profit. This “gold-plating” incentive is a well-known in regulatory economics.
Regulators, the industry and their associations have explained higher spending on networks in a variety of ways: higher reliability standards; flawed rules; flawed forecasting of demand growth; and the need to make up for historic underinvestment.
But was there ever historic underinvestment? A 1995 article co-authored by the current AEMC chair concluded that distribution networks had been significantly overbuilt. That was more than two decades ago, government distributor regulated assets are at least three times bigger per customer now.
The chart below – based on data from the AER’s website – examines how the 12 large distributors that cover New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia spent their money on infrastructure between 2006 and 2013. This period covers the last five-year price controls established by the state regulators, and the first control established by the AER. It was during this time that expenditure ballooned. The monetary amounts in this chart are normalised by the number of customers per distributor.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191134/original/file-20171019-1072-1b07x7v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
 Distributor spending on infrastructure between 2006 and 2013. Author provided
The first five distributors from left to right (and Aurora) were owned by state governments and the others are privately owned. A clear pattern emerges: the government distributors typically built much more infrastructure than the private distributors. And the government distributors focused their spending on substations, which are much easier to build (or expand or replace) than new distribution lines or cables.
We also know that the distributors’ spending on substations far outstripped the increases in the peak demand on their networks. The figure below compares the change in the government and private distributors’ substation capacity (the blue bars) with demand (the red bars) over the period that most of the expenditure occurred. Again, the amounts have been normalised by number of customers.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191133/original/file-20171019-1075-d1dvow.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Substation capacity versus peak demand between 2006 and 2013. Author provided
The gap in spending between government and private distributors is stark. It is also obvious that in all cases, but particularly for the government distributors, the expansion of substation capacity greatly exceeded demand growth - which hardly changed over this period (and is even lower now, per connection).
To put it in more tangible terms, as an average across the industry, peak demand between 2006 to 2013 increased by the equivalent of the power used by one old-fashioned incandescent light bulb, per customer. But government distributors expanded their substation capacity by more than one 100 light bulbs, per customer. The private distributors did relatively better, but still increased the capacity of their substations by the equivalent of about 30 light bulbs per customer.
My PhD thesis included econometric analysis that shows government ownership in Australia is associated with regulated asset values that are 56% higher than private distributors, and regulated revenues that are 24% higher, leaving all other factors the same.
To some, this evidence supports a “government bad, private good” conclusion. Indeed it was this line of argument that the Baird government in New South Wales used to justify its partial privatisation of two network service providers.
But in international comparisons of government and private distributors in the United States, Europe and New Zealand, no such stark differences are to be found. The huge disparity between government and private distributors is a peculiarly Australian phenomenon.
<h2>How we got here</h2>
This Australian exception originates in chronic policy and regulatory failure. As far back as 2011, the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) heard a proposal that government distributors should earn a return closer to their actual cost of financing – a suggestion that would have reduced prices significantly and removed the incentive to gold plate.
In response, the AEMC said the regulations were consistent with the “competitive neutrality” policy. But this is not true: in the policy’s own words, it was designed to stop government businesses from crowding out competitors. Distributors are protected monopolies; they do not have competitors.
The AEMC also argued, somewhat bizarrely, that it was good economics for a regulator to assume that government distributors are privately financed.
This represents the triumph of an idealistic “normative” regulatory model in which regulators act on the basis of how the regulated entity should behave rather than how they actually behave.
But it would wrong to blame the AEMC alone for this failure. All of Australia’s key institutions and governments have agreed that government distributors should be regulated as if they are privately financed. For governments that own their distributors, this has been a wonderfully profitable fiction.
Therein lies much of the explanation for what is effectively, if I may call a spade a spade, a racket.
It is an indictment of Australia’s polity and so many of its economists that the 2011 Garnaut Climate Change Review stands alone, in a library of reviews, as stating this problem clearly. In fact, if you review last week’s report from the ACCC, you will not find a single distinction between the impact of government and private distributors.
And if you thought this was yesterday’s war, you would be wrong. Despite the mass of evidence, our regulators persist in the fiction that ownership and regulation should be independent of one another.
It is difficult not to lapse into despair about Australia’s energy policy morass. Despite the valiant attempts by many, a deeply entrenched culture of half-truths, vested interests, ideology and wishful thinking still characterises all too much of what emanates from the political and administrative leadership of this industry.
Some energy consumers – Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull among them – will buy their way out of this problem through solar panels and batteries. But the poorest households and many business customers will increasingly be left carrying the can.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86045/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Australians are angry about electricity. Not unreasonably.
Bruce Mountain is director of carbon and energy markets at Victoria University.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/energy-prices-are-high-because-consumers-are-paying-for-useless-profit-boosting-infrastructure-86045" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Energy prices are high because consumers are paying for useless, profit-boosting infrastructure: Bruce Mountain

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/63597/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The energy sector is dealing with a complex mix of relationships between consumer trends, global commodity markets, and state, federal and industry regulation.
Because large established companies in electricity generation and distribution and coal and natural gas export have a lot of influence in this process, Australian energy regulations reflect more traditional energy provision rather than global trends where renewable energy is becoming more prevalent.
State governments are currently coming to terms with the regulatory changes needed to accommodate public support for disruptive technology. One example is the ongoing adoption of ride-sharing company Uber. However this same pragmatism needs to be reflected in preparations for the provision and consumption of energy in Australia. The energy companies that are prepared for this disruption will survive and flourish, while those that cling to traditional structures will struggle.
<div id="responsive-iframe-0">Evidence of disruption</div>
Globally energy companies are already showing signs of being affected by the looming disruption. Coal miners have been subjected to multiple forces over the last decade, but the changing landscape associated with new forms of energy, is a strong influencer of their performance. Coal companies in the US are facing dwindling share prices or bankruptcy like Peabody Energy and Arch Coal.
Tesla’s share price, which increased from US$28.52 in August 2012 to US$220 in August 2016, is more than double that of more traditional vehicle company Toyota. Toyota has experienced moderate growth from US$79.62 in August 2012. With electric vehicles forcing themselves into the motor vehicle market, technological disruptors like Tesla are seen as more likely to succeed than traditional motor vehicle companies like Ford.
West Texas Intermediate, a benchmark international oil price, declined from US$133 a barrel in July 2008 to US$45 a barrel in July 2016. This followed a slowdown in global growth after the global financial crisis and increased production of oil in Saudi Arabia, which some claim is to gain market share. Coal prices for export from Australia have fallen from A$180 a tonne in July 2008 to A$63 a tonne in July 2016 as China’s voracious appetite for coal has declined.
International natural gas prices have also declined because in Europe the natural gas price has been referenced to the oil price. Separate to this, the US price of natural gas declined as a result of new drilling technologies which released huge quantities of natural gas onto the US market, dragging down the price.
Many of these global trends are apparent in Australia too. Coal export prices have caused concerns for existing companies to the extent that new mine development has been shelved since 2008. Coal mine profits have dwindled and job losses abound.
Ambitious plans for coal seam and natural gas extraction for export to Asian markets have been curtailed with some experts predicting still further price declines in response to oversupply.
While there have been recent small upticks in prices, the trend for Australian primary energy company share prices since early 2014 has been downwards.
<h2>Challenges facing the Australian electricity generation sector</h2>
The electricity sector in Australia is facing multiple challenges. Electricity consumption has declined since 2009 and is forecast to increase only slightly by 2035/6. The closing of large energy users like the Kurri Kurri aluminium smelter and the Clyde Oil refinery, and a shift by residential consumers to the consumption of electricity from solar panels have contributed to this trend.
This is coupled with increasing supply of energy from low marginal cost wind power which, if the Australian National Energy Market is working as designed, reduces the spot price for electricity.
Many electricity generators have launched or acquired retail businesses to market directly to customers. AGL and Origin are the two largest of these “gentailers”, with a combined 56% of the small customer market in the eastern states. However, there is potential for disruption to this existing industry model. 1.57 million households now have solar panels on their roofs, and residential batteries are expected to increase consumer control of residential electricity.
Startups like Sunverge, Reposit and Powerledger are looking to connect households with spare energy to households buying spare energy. Mojo Power is offering customers fixed price packages that are more reminiscent of mobile phone offers than electricity. At this stage it is unclear whether the National Electricity Market will play a part in, or hinder, these new business models.
A few retail companies, like Red, Lumo, Powershop and Infinite spruik their renewable energy credentials. Renewable energy is viewed very favourably by the public.
Recent polling suggests that 71% of respondents would favour a government that facilitated greater support for solar panels and batteries. Energy giant AGL has a larger renewable energy portfolio than Origin making it slightly more attractive to consumers with environmental concerns, but it is exposed to the risk of owning a large coal generation fleet.
Infigen is the only renewable, publicly listed company. Infigen faced torrid times during the multiple back-to-back reviews of the Renewable Energy Target, but since the target has been set at 33GWh, Infigen’s share price has been recovering.
Of note, is the share prices of domestic energy companies AGL and Origin who are both in the business of generating and retailing electricity and previously were both engaged in the development of coal seam gas. Origin has continued its coal seam gas investment while AGL exited the market. AGL has instead focused more on diversifying its electricity generation portfolio. Part of this strategy has involved formulating innovative plans for virtual power stations of consolidated rooftop solar panels and residential batteries.
Origin’s foray into the export of Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) has not been good for its share price. Concern over debt related to the investment in LNG and exposure to declining LNG prices has worried investors.
<h2>Electricity distribution also faces multiple challenges</h2>
Electricity distribution companies in Australia are regulated monopolies. Distribution companies in NSW and QLD have been government owned and as a result of hefty investment plans, large electricity price rises were passed through to customers after 2009. This was at the same time as environmental charges were being included in electricity tariffs.
Customers were angered by the rise in electricity prices, but the NSW and QLD governments have enjoyed the profits that have flowed back into state coffers.
The NSW government is now seeking to sell a large share of its distribution businesses, although the most promising buyers have been knocked back by the federal government due to security concerns. With the popularity of solar panels and the expectation about the benefits of battery storage to meet demand after sundown, investors buying into the electricity distribution sector will be facing disruption.
Origin and AGL have gambled on different strategies to face a future with carbon constraints and technological disruption. Origin has bet on natural gas being a transition fuel to a cleaner energy future, while AGL is betting on electricity from renewable sources with batteries as the preferred path.
Energy distribution companies need to wrestle with the technological disruption that is looming from decentralised, distributed generation from solar panels, batteries and peer-to-peer energy transactions. Coal miners should seriously consider diversification to face a carbon-constrained future. The energy sector is in a state of transition; profits and share prices may be volatile for a few years to come. It would be advantageous if regulation did not get in the way of the shifts already evident.
Lynette Molyneaux is researcher, Energy Economics and Management Group, Global Change Institute, The University of Queensland and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lynette-molyneaux-9433" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Energy Cost

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Energy Cost

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News