ANAO Report No.11 2014–15 The Award of Grants under the Clean Technology Program
68
Figure 2.4: Total carbon emissions produced in Australia, 2000–2010
Source: The World Bank.
2.70 After
ANAO pointed out that the program’s KPI was not consistent with
the then Government’s broader policy objective to reduce carbon pollution
by five per cent from 2000 levels by 2020, the department advised ANAO
in October 2014 that: It
was never the intent to directly link the program to the Governmentʹs target. Rather,
the program indirectly supported the achievement of the Government
ʹs policy objectives through helping manufacturers invest in low pollution
technologies.
2.71 In
November 2014, the department further advised ANAO in relation to
the program KPI that: The
Department determined the KPI of 5 per cent based on the available evidence
base at the time. Consultations with Department of Climate Change and
Energy Efficiency as policy owner of the overarching initiative and Department
of Resources, Energy and Tourism indicated that the most relevant
available data set was provided by the Energy Efficiency Opportunities
Program. The Department drew on analysis from the Program Report
Continuing Opportunities 2011. [The report] notes ‘Corporations in the EEO
program have combined adopted energy savings equivalent to 5.4 per cent
of the energy assessed to date, compared to 5.1 per cent in 2010, 4.5 per cent
in 2009 and 4.2 per cent in 2008.’ The Department considered this target to be
conservative noting that the EEO customer cohort are typically large emissions
intensive businesses. The Department had no evidence base to confirm
the likely emissions reductions that might be achieved by smaller less emissions
intensive businesses.
200 225
250 275
300 325
350 375
400 425
2000 2001
2002 2003
2004 2005
2006 2007
2008 2009
2010
Carbon emissions
kt 000s
Year
ʹ ʹ
ANAO Report No.11 2014–15 The Award of Grants under the Clean Technology Program
69
Reporting on performance
2.72 In
its 2012–13 Annual Report, the department stated that 98.7 per cent of
companies assisted under the programs reported a minimum five per cent reduction
in carbon emissions intensity. In relation to performance reported under
the programs, the department advised ANAO in July 2014 that: This
figure [98.7] was calculated using the number of applications approved in
2012–13 from both the Clean Technology Investment Program and Clean Technology
Food and Foundries Investment Program. Out of 476 approved projects
that accepted the offer, 6 projects predicted less than 5 reduction in carbon
intensity.
2.73 However,
the expected outcomes of projects were not: recorded in the IA
committee recommendation as discussed in paragraph 5.14 or the decision made
by the delegate; or consistently recorded in funding agreements. In this respect,
the department advised ANAO in September 2014 that: In
any instance where the Committee considered a reframed project, as part of recording
the Committee’s recommendation AusIndustry also recorded the agreed
carbon metrics that formed the basis for that decision.
2.74 ANAO
examined the spreadsheet of agreed carbon metrics referred to in
this audit report as the expected outcomes of the projects and compared this
data with outcomes listed in funding agreements. This analysis revealed that:
the
agreed metrics provided by the department did not match the metrics
stated in 72 funding agreements 13 per cent of executed funding
agreements with a total value of 62.2 million. The average difference
between these metrics was seven per cent;
expected outcomes, in terms of the reduction in carbon emissions
intensity, were not included in 34 funding agreements six per cent of
executed funding agreements with a total value of 21.6 million;
for
projects that were reframed, the carbon metrics listed in the spreadsheet
were not identified as having been revised; and
carbon metrics were entered without a clear explanation of the source
of that metric the possible sources included the application form, the
departmental assessment or the IA committee assessment.
2.75 In
addition, the KPI aggregates a number of different emissions intensity
reductions that are not measured in the same way. Specifically, as
