NEG! Is a lemon. What does it mean to Billy Bloggs? SFA.Mr Bloggs scratches his head and goes "huh?".
AGL and other suppliers would be satisfied to see heavy industries/users go offshore, as they are then free to drive remaining coal fired power generating assets into the ground and charge mega bucks to the domestic user for the privilege. And be heavily subsidised to supply green/renewable to same.
Edit. Drove past the old power house at Wallerwang, over the weekend. The water cooling faciilities have been removed. No chance of that site producing power again.
I've tried to get my head around it - without much success. It seems to have noble aims - reduce emissions, more reliable supply, stable or lower prices. And then you have some saying it'll kill investment in renewables, others saying it is too aggressive in reducing emissions, and also quite a few saying it won't reduce costs or improve reliability. I suppose it depends on one's ideology and economic outlook.
My gut-feeling: Propping up old coal-fired power stations will add to power bills. Gas will still get offloaded cheaply to overseas while we get ripped off. And a drying up of investment in renewables will cause a shortage of power and reduce reliability. Basically the opposite of the NEG's aims.