Solar schools 10 times dearer, doubly unsafe

THE federal government is paying 10 times its carbon price to cut greenhouse gas emissions at thousands of schools.

THE federal government is paying 10 times its carbon price to cut greenhouse gas emissions at thousands of schools, according to a highly critical audit that warns of safety risks under the program.

Labor's election pledge to install solar panels in every school has emerged as one of the most expensive schemes to reduce emissions, prompting the Auditor-General to question the policy's cost and value for money.

The audit challenges big claims made during the 2007 election campaign, when Labor promised to make "an important contribution to the planet" by giving every school $50,000 to spend on solar panels and other equipment.

While Labor's carbon tax will cost $23 for every tonne of emissions, the Solar Schools program will cost about $284 per tonne in an estimate that is likely to understate the "considerable" cost of the scheme, the audit concludes.

Policy experts cited the new audit as grounds for concern. "If you're really about reducing greenhouse gases, you should be doing it as cheaply as possible so you can get the most abatement," said Frontier Economics managing director Danny Price.

"This type of scheme makes no economic sense whatsoever. It's just ridiculous in terms of the total cost of abatement."

Climate Institute chief executive John Connor expressed reservations about the cost but said the scheme had benefits.

"It's clearly way too much for a macro-level scheme," he said. "But this was not a scheme that was designed just with cost-effectiveness in mind -- it's also educative."

While one of the program's objectives was to generate renewable energy, another was to provide educational benefits for school students and their communities.

The scheme has been cut back twice from its original $480 million promise to about $215m, with funding going to 4600 schools so far, rather than the 9500 schools first promised.

The audit raises concerns about the safety of the installations based on the government's own surveys of solar panels fitted under various schemes in schools, homes and community buildings.

"The outcomes from solar power safety inspections show that the proportion of non-compliant potentially hazardous systems under the (program)

is almost twice the level of

non-compliant, potentially hazardous systems for (the department's) solar inspection program as a whole," the audit warns.

Cabinet secretary Mark Dreyfus argued that the high cost of abatement demonstrated that a carbon price was the most cost-effective way to cut pollution and drive investment in renewables.

"The National Solar Schools Programs has been designed with the broader aim of educating students and the wider community on energy generation, renewable energy, energy efficiency to save money, and managing water resources," a spokeswoman for Mr Dreyfus said. "For example, using a web-based metering system, students are able to measure renewable energy generated from solar panels, monitor energy consumption and incorporate the data into maths and science classes." A spokesman for Mr Dreyfus said there were no safety incidents.