A potential option for streamlining renewable energy approvals in Australia
At a glance
Australia’s vision to become a global leader in renewable energy is not just ambitious; with our rich solar and wind resources, it’s got a good chance of becoming a reality. However, the environment and planning approvals pathway supporting renewables development in Australia is often slow, complex and frustratingly inconsistent. So, how can we de-risk the energy transition and streamline approvals for renewable energy projects?
The contaminated land site auditor model, which has been successfully used by the environmental regulator across multiple states nationally, offers a promising way forward for the energy and resources industry. Below, we delve into the current challenges facing renewable energy project approvals, the benefits of the site auditor approach, and how we could apply the lessons learned from this model to help transform the renewable energy landscape.
Addressing the bottleneck in the approvals process
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 is Australia’s primary legislation governing environmental impact assessment and approval for projects affecting matters of national environmental significance. The EPBC process is often lengthy and complex, requiring multiple levels of assessment, consultation and approval.
The EPBC Act is independently reviewed every ten years. The most recent review, known as the Samuel Review, was undertaken by Professor Graeme Samuel and supported by a panel of experts. In response to the Samuel Review, the Australian Government committed to reforming Australia’s environmental laws to better protect, restore and manage the environment. The Nature Positive Plan sets out to strengthen and streamline Australia’s environmental laws.
As part of its plan to progress the Nature Positive law reforms, the Federal Budget committed $96.6 million for the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) to support timely environmental approval decisions, aiming to provide more support for project assessment, better planning in priority regions and more funding for threatened species research.
A recurring theme we hear from the investor and developer community is the significant and increasing time it takes to secure EPBC approvals for renewable energy projects in Australia. The Samuel Review found that the complexity of the EPBC Act makes it time-consuming and costly for proponents given the ‘heavy reliance on detailed prescriptive processes that are convoluted and inflexible’. This was identified as particularly being the case for environmental impact assessment.
Understanding the duration and complexity of the approvals process is key to de-risking renewable energy projects. Committing material funding to the realisation of a more streamlined approach to renewable energy project approvals should help improve investor confidence, without compromising biodiversity and social outcomes.
Another significant challenge identified in the Samuel Review is the skills shortage within the agencies responsible for approvals, such as DCCEEW and the state and territory regulators . The review calls for a broader uplift in skills to make the most of emerging technologies and translate science and analysis into decisions. Adopting a more pragmatic approach and collaborating across disciplines is crucial, given that rigid, outdated guidelines often lag behind modern practices and innovations in the sector.
In response, the government is establishing an independent national environment protection agency, known as Environment Protection Australia (EPA). EPA will be responsible for administering the requirements of the EPBC Act, and the new Nature Positive reforms, and will have stronger compliance and enforcement powers including the ability to issue ‘stop-work’ orders for any likely contravention of the EPBC Act.
Priority areas that could streamline the approvals process
The suggestions proposed in the Samuel Review aim to enable Australia to meet future development needs in a sustainable way, supporting long-term economic growth, environmental improvement and the protection of Australia’s iconic heritage for the benefit of future generations. There are four key areas we believe could help de-risk the energy transition and streamline renewable energy approvals, whilst managing and mitigating impacts to the environment and communities in which these projects are proposed:
- Prioritisation: The EPBC framework should adopt a risk-based approach to prioritise and differentiate among projects, simplifying approvals for low-risk projects. Clear and transparent criteria and methodology for assessing project risk, along with regular communication among project proponents, regulators and stakeholders, are essential.
- Upskilling: Agencies responsible for approvals should invest in upskilling and training their staff to strengthen their technical skills, experience and interdisciplinary collaboration. A comprehensive, ongoing professional development program, as well as a mentoring and peer review system, are crucial to build staff competence and confidence.
- National renewables auditor network: DCCEEW should develop a pool of independent, accredited renewables assessors to undertake assessment of approval applications on behalf of the new EPA. The scheme could operate similarly to the contaminated site auditor scheme (which we talk more about below), leveraging the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand’s Certified Environmental Practitioner (EIANZ CEnvP) scheme (or similar) to identify and secure accredited assessors. A harmonised, rigorous accreditation scheme and a robust, transparent assessment and review system will ensure this pool of assessors are qualified and accountable.
- Public awareness: The energy and resources industry should increase public awareness and understanding of the independent assessor network and its potential benefits for renewable energy projects. A proactive communication and education campaign and a collaborative stakeholder engagement strategy are vital to earn support from the community.
These priority areas are crucial for addressing the current challenges and improving the EPBC approvals process for renewable energy projects. Are there other potential avenues to streamlining the assessment process from another industry? It’s possible we don’t need to completely reinvent the wheel, with a solution that’s already worked successfully in the contamination and remediation sector.
A potential solution from the contamination and remediation sector
The contamination and remediation sector has adopted a site auditor model in most states and territories across Australia, with some states having their own scheme, and others recognising auditors accredited in other states. A site auditor is an independent and accredited specialist who, along with an expert support team, reviews and certifies contaminated land reports and plans prepared by project proponents or consultants, often associated with brownfield redevelopment. Most states with site auditor schemes have planning guidelines which provide consent authorities the option to involve a site auditor to carry out independent reviews as part of a development proposal.
The process of appointing site auditors is a rigorous one, and scheme guidelines typically have strong controls around conflicts of interest. Site auditors are themselves audited by their accreditation body (EPA or equivalent) on a regular basis to ensure consistency and compliance with applicable guidelines and legislation.
The site auditor model allows regulators and consent authorities to delegate some specialist review aspects to site auditors, especially where the regulator does not possess sufficient in-house expertise or resources to complete a review. In that instance, the auditor provides an independent and objective opinion on the technical and environmental aspects of a project, within their area of expertise (i.e. contaminated land). This can help speed up the approval process and provide more robustness and transparency for complex or contentious projects.
The site auditor model has several benefits:
- First, it streamlines the process and reduces approval times and costs, as site auditors act as a single point of contact, providing consistent, reliable assessments.
- Second, it builds confidence and accountability among project proponents and regulators, since site auditors offer high levels of technical expertise and professional integrity and are subject to audits and reviews.
- Third, it encourages a culture of continuous improvement and collaboration, as site auditors can keep up to date on the latest technologies and practices and provide feedback and guidance to both project proponents and regulators.
To reduce global carbon emissions and achieve our net zero goals by 2050, we need to transition our energy and resources industry to renewables. Given the contaminated site sector’s success in applying the site auditor model to date, and noting the existing EIANZ CEnvP Scheme, could we use a similar approach by establishing an independent pool of accredited EPBC Act assessors to help streamline the EPBC approvals process for renewable energy projects in Australia?