"It is important to reflect on that when you are sitting there under pressure [and people are] saying 'you’ve got to agree to this'. But we’ve all got our global-citizen responsibility as well." The states and territories are resolving their positions on the Turnbull government’s flagship energy plan ahead of a critical meeting of the Council of Australian Government’s energy ministers on August 10. The ACT fears the energy plan will jeopardise its renewable energy target. Under the plan, energy retailers would be required to deliver both a set level of reliable power that can be delivered on demand, and low-emissions electricity. The government says the policy will shore up east coast electricity supplies, reduce power bills and help decarbonise the electricity grid. While any jurisdiction can veto the proposal, the ACT – which has loudly voiced its concerns – has been painted as the most likely wrecker of a peace deal.

Mr Rattenbury rejects the tag, but says his small jurisdiction has a number of threshold concerns. One is “truly fundamental” – protecting the ACT’s goal to source 100 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020. The ACT is concerned that renewable energy generation it contracts in other states would not count towards its own targets – forcing it to buy more renewable energy elsewhere. However Mr Rattenbury said the Energy Security Board, which is devising the policy on behalf of the government, had shown “plenty of goodwill” to resolve the problem. But on two other issues the government has shown an “intransigence” that risks scuttling any deal, he said. The first is the modest emissions reduction targets to be imposed on the electricity sector. Environment and Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg last week proposed allowing a review of the target in 2024, five years earlier than expected.

Loading Replay Replay video Play video Play video Mr Rattenbury dismissed suggestions that this represented a peace offer. ‘The original proposal had a five year timeline, it then went out to 10 years and it’s essentially come back to five years so it’s a false olive branch,” he said. The government wants the emissions reduction target – 26 per cent by 2030 – enshrined in law, meaning a future government would need the backing of both houses of Parliament to raise the target. The closure of ageing coal-fired power stations means each state must transition to renewable energy, the ACT says. Credit:Paul Jones

Mr Rattenbury said there was "a lot of merit" in instead allowing this to be done through regulation, circumventing parliament and ensuring an evidence-based decision, rather than one a politically driven one. However the government says legislating the target would create certainty, and the Coalition’s right wing is unlikely to back any measure that makes lifting the target easier. Also built into the policy is a second bone of contention: deep emissions cuts by jurisdictions with strong renewable energy targets would count towards the national target rather than being additional to it. Loading Mr Frydenberg has said the government’s position on this is "unequivocal".

But Mr Rattenbury says jurisdictions doing relatively little to encourage renewable energy, such as NSW, will be allowed to "coast along" on the efforts of others. "That’s bad for the energy market in the long term. We need an orderly transition to the clean energy future," he said, adding that this was crucial to maintain reliability as coal-fired plants closed. Mr Rattenbury says he vacillates "between optimism and pessimism" on whether Australia, and the world, will get its act together on tackling climate change. "I’m optimistic because I believe as a species we are capable of doing this," he said. "But I do worry about the politics and self-interest."