Confirming a long held belief that energy companies and power companies are charging more than it costs them to meet the NZETS, OceanaGold has refused to pay Z for its diesel citing the fact it is is being overcharged for the carbon content.
In Australia it was made clear by the regulator that it would not tolerate overcharging for carbon, the same sort of comment was made by the New Zealand Commerce Commission. However its been clear to commentators for some time that after the collapse of NZU prices the consumer is still paying much more for their emissions than the real cost of carbon credits. Someone therefore appears to be profiting from this. Is that wrong?
According to the New Zealand High Court, no. In the following release from Scoop http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1302/S00151/z-energy-in-stoush-over-cost-of-ets.htm the judge appears to see nothing wrong with Z action.
It seems that someone has missed the point that the energy suppliers justified price increases on the back of the NZETS, were warned not to profit, and are alleged to have done just that!
New Zealand consumers should be used to this sort of treatment though, the power companies have been repeatedly chastised for overcharging consumers for electricity. Any action? Not that we can see, and will it be the same in this case?