Is this an argument that there will be no additional emissions because the $2/kg isn't enough to make projects happen?

Yes, it's a bit late to be having this debate now, with legislation already in progress.

I would argue that we _don't_ need to take into account the REGO requirement. REGO's will be so massively oversupplied by existing renewable projects that buying and surrendering REGO's has no marginal effect.

And some further thoughts on the topic :) open.substack.com/pub/deeperde...

e.g. lets say an electrolyser has sold their output at $4/kg with a mix of customer offtake and subsidy. They would only want to curtail at ~$80/MWh as the power is worth more than their H2 above that price. ISP assumptions for coal SRMC are well below that. So in periods with less wind and sun...

Catch 22? There are no additional emissions because the subsidy isn't large enough to make H2 projects happen?

I think you might have fun building a dodgy spreadsheet to calculate the short-run "indifference price" for an electrolyser with a subsidy large enough to pay for the electrolyser.

Hi. Good episode, but... The strategy didn't grapple with the increased emissions from electrolysers under current Hydrogen Headstart and REGO surrender design.
deeperdecarb.substack.com/p/hydrogen-h...

See also @jessejenkins.bsky.social on a similar topic.
engineering.princeton.edu/news/2022/12...

Shameless ping @grogsgamut.bsky.social

Could Carbon be a feature of the 2030 NEM re-design?
deeperdecarb.substack.com/p/does-2030-...

And will a NEM re-design be even remotely useful if it doesn't consider capital investment efficiency as the primary objective?
deeperdecarb.substack.com/p/capital-in...

Should Vic just raise the brown coal royalty if they care about climate?
deeperdecarb.substack.com/p/could-vict...