AGL announces that they might close Loy Yang A as early as 2035 … 10 years earlier than previously stated

Also in the news today is the announcement out of AGL Energy that they would close by the end of the 2035 Financial Year.

Here’s some of the key documents from the company itself:

36-page ASX and Media Release 28-page ‘Climate Transition Action Plan’



Above is the company’s (36-page) ASX and Media Release titled ‘Outcomes of Review of Strategic Direction and FY23 earnings guidance’.

With the headline being…

‘AGL targets an accelerated exit from all coal fired generation, announcing today a targeted earlier closure date of Loy Yang A Power Station – up to 10 years earlier than previously announced

This was accompanied by its (28-page) inaugural ‘Climate Transition Action Plan (September 2022)’.

This includes the added detail (footnote 1 on p3):

‘Asset management plans will be structured to support the targeted closure of Loy Yang A Power Station by the end of FY35, and AGL will notify AEMO that the Expected Closure Year (per the National Electricity Rules (NER) 2.2.1(e)(2A)) for Loy Yang A Power Station is the end of FY35.

Further, the carrying value of AGL’s ‘Generation’ cash generating unit property, plant and equipment has been reduced as a result of the targeted closure of Loy Yang A Power Station by the end of FY35, as reflected in the impairment announced to the market on 29 September 2022. 

The ability for AGL to execute on this target will be subject to uncertainties and risks, as described on page 12.’

… so there’s a fair bit to take in.

More to come…



(A)  Media Coverage of the ESB and/or AER releases

Apart from this article, here is some of the coverage I have seen:

1)   here on WattClarity:

(a)  There’s  this article, published on the day of the AGL announcement.

(b)  On Sunday 9th October 2022 we asked ‘How much capacity would be required to replace Loy Yang A power station?’

2)   via the ABC:

(a)  There’s the article ‘AGL announces it will close Loy Yang A power station in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley up to 10 years sooner than planned’, with author not noted when I read it.

3)  via RenewEconomy:

(a)  Sophie Vorrath started with  ‘AGL joins Australian coal exodus with target for complete exit by 2035’ .

(b)  Later that day, Sophie asked  ‘AGL is quitting coal: What now on renewables, workers and the bottom line?’ .

4)  via AFR:

(a)  Colin Packham wrote ‘AGL to hasten exit from coal, needs $20b’ .

(b)  by early afternoon Chanticleer had contributed how ‘AGL risks being caught in $100b green boom’ .

(c)  Jennifer Hewett shared her Opinion that ‘AGL’s plan B: Turn out the lights on coal’ .

(d)  at the end of the day, Mark Ludlow flagged ‘AGL signals the end of coal. Now the hard work really begins’ …. including a note at the bottom that:

‘There is no doubt Australia needs to scale back its coal-fired power to help cut its carbon emissions by 43 per cent by 2030 and then net zero by 2050.

But there is an element of “Hail Mary” in the expectation that wind, solar, batteries, pumped hydro and yet-to-be-developed hydrogen can easily replace synchronous coal-fired power.

Hold on for the ride.’

… reflecting on some of the challenges identified through GenInsights21, for instance.

(e)  On Friday 30th September this announcement (and that by QLD Government) was the focus of the Editor’s ‘Generator exits highlight energy promise and risks’ .

5)  via the Australian

(a) Nick Evans has written ‘AGL says it will cost $20bn to green energy portfolio, pulls forward Loy Yang coal closure by a decade’.

(b) This morning Eric Johnston wrote ‘Mike Cannon-Brookes’ peace deal with AGL Energy comes at high cost’.

(c) In the afternoon, Kylar Loussikian asked an important question ‘Who will fund AGL’s green vision?’ in Data Room … not the only one asking questions like:

(i)  How much will it all cost?

(ii)  Who will pay?

(iii)  Is it equitable/sustainable, etc?

(d) At the end of the day, Eric Johnston wrote ‘Tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes sparks AGL Energy’s green reboot’.

(e) At the end of Friday 30th September, Nick Evans wrote ‘Market responds positively to AGL’s $20bn power reset focusing on batteries’.

6)  via the Guardian

(a)  Peter Hannam wrote ‘AGL will close Victoria’s coal-fired power station Loy Yang A a decade early’.

7)  via PV magazine

(a) David Carroll wrote ‘AGL Energy accelerates plan to abandon coal completely’.

8)  via the Age/SMH

(a)  Miki Perkins and Mike Foley wrote ‘AGL expected to close Loy Yang power station a decade early’.

9)  via the New Daily

(a)  Richie Merzian wrote ‘Largest coal plant to close early, but where is the national roadmap to manage the rest?’.



(B)  Industry Organisation comment

In addition to the media articles above, I’ve also seen the following from various industry organisations:

1)   The Australian Energy Council:

(a)  Anything?

2)   The Clean Energy Council:

(a)  Anything?

3)   The Smart Energy Council:

(a)  Anything?

4)  The Energy Users Association of Australia:

(a)  As noted here earlier, the EUAA made reference to the AGL closure announcement in writing that ‘ESB & AER Reports Are Clear, The Transition Will Not Be Easy Or Cheap But Hard And Expensive.


(C)  Other commentary we have seen

In addition to all of the above, our team have also come across a number of comments that might be of interest to readers here:

1)  Environment Victoria:

(a)  Published the media release ‘AGL announce Loy Yang to close by 2035 confirming accelerating shift away from coal’.

2)  The Climate Council:

(a)  Published the media release ‘AGL joins Australia’s big coal exodus, experts and locals respond’.

3)  In the Conversation:

(a)  Tim Nelson wrote, on Friday 30th September, ‘So long, Loy Yang: shutting Australia’s dirtiest coal plant a decade early won’t jeopardise our electricity supply’.



About the Author

Paul McArdle
One of three founders of Global-Roam back in 2000, Paul has been CEO of the company since that time. As an author on WattClarity, Paul's focus has been to help make the electricity market more understandable.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.