The Guardian March 20, 2002

Basslink's a lemon, but it's got the nod

by Peter Mac

Construction of the controversial Basslink cable, which the Victorian and 
Tasmanian state governments have proposed to link their two state 
electricity grids, has been given a conditional approval by a special 
governmental advisory panel.

The proposal has received widespread criticism, because of the likely 
adverse environmental impacts, the high costs, and the likelihood of the 
project causing severe corrosion to nearby marine structures and damage to 
the marine environment.

The proposal as recommended by the proponents of the plan, the private firm 
Basslink Pty Ltd and Hydro Tasmania, involved constructing a series of 
giant (50-metre) pylons to carry the new cable 62km across Victoria's 
beautiful Gippsland countryside from the Loy Yang power station in the 
Hunter Valley to the coastline. From there it would be conducted in a 
"monopole" marine pipeline across Bass Strait to Tasmania.

That was the cheapest option. However, it was also the most environmentally 

The governmental advisory panel, which was established to assess the 
feasibility of the Basslink scheme, recommended putting the line 
underground, but for the first seven kilometres only.

This has been rejected by angry local residents and environmental groups as 
a form of tokenism which would still leave a hideous scar on the Gippsland 

The panel also recommended that the submarine cable be a bi-pole type, in 
order to avoid the problems of bi-metallic corrosion in adjacent structures 
in the waters of Bass Strait.

This would involve an estimated extra cost of $100 million, which would be 
largely borne by the Tasmanian consumers.

Moreover, Esso and Duke Energy, operators of Bass strait oil and gas 
extraction facilities, claim that even this would not avoid accelerated 
corrosion of the oil and gas platforms and the rupture of the pipeline, 
because of the presence of the new Basslink cable.

Despite these problems, all the governments involved  Victorian, 
Tasmanian and Commonwealth  appear determined to push ahead with the 

The opponents of the scheme have challenged its validity on perfectly 
legitimate grounds, i.e. damage to the environment and high costs. However, 
the proposal also raises basic questions about the need for such a huge 

After all, Tasmania has traditionally had no trouble meeting its energy 
needs, and it is doubtful whether any excess the state generates in future 
would have a significant effect on the amount of power supplied to the 
national electricity grid.

The answer surely lies in the privatisation of public electricity services.

There are three basic aspects to the process of providing such services, 
i.e. the initial generation, the distribution and the sale of electricity 
services to consumers.

The States are gradually privatising (in the name of competition) these 
aspects and introducing new unnecessary layers into the process. The pace 
and extent of privatisation largely depends on the degree of trade union 
and public opposition.

The process of privatisation is introducing many layers of profit, all at 
extra cost to the consumer. The heavily promoted "benefits" of this 
arrangement are fictitious.

For example, the energy "suppliers" pay the generating authorities for bulk 
orders of electricity. This electricity may be traded several times before 
the wholesaler sells it to the retailer who then sells it to the consumer. 
The only beneficiaries are the private, parasitic traders, advertisers and 
other marketing-related companies.

It was much more efficient, cheaper and reliable when the one publicly 
owned utility carried out the whole process consumer.

As a result consumers pay for totally unnecessary and parasitic overlays in 
the process of electricity generation, distribution and sales in which the 
only beneficiaries are the private marketers.

The proposed construction of the new Basslink facility involves the private 
sector directly in the means of distribution.

The connection of the Tasmanian system to the national grid by means of the 
Basslink facility would appear to have more to do with profit generation 
and private takeover of an essential service, than with ensuring continuity 
of electricity supply for Tasmania.

Back to index page