Australia can't electrify its future without testing capability

Five years after the Lane Cove Test Station closed its doors, Australia is only now beginning to confront the consequences. What was once treated as the loss of a single facility is increasingly being recognised as the loss of a national capability.

That reality was laid bare at a recent industry-wide forum run by Australian Industry Group examining the gap left by Lane Cove's closure. The message from speakers with decades of experience across manufacturing, standards development, system operation and forensic engineering was consistent and sobering: Australia's energy transition, safety framework and industrial competitiveness are now running ahead of our ability to independently test the equipment they rely on.

Jeff Davis, an industry veteran from NHP and long‑time standards practitioner with experience across heavy industry, construction and electrical manufacturing, described the market forces reshaping electrical equipment. Global demand for copper is accelerating, driven by electrification, electric vehicles and data centres. As copper prices rise and supply tightens, international manufacturers are already moving towards aluminium busbars and new materials in switchboards.

These shifts are being reflected in emerging standards, particularly AS/NZS 61439. But every material substitution and design change requires full short‑circuit and thermal testing. Without a domestic high‑power test facility, Australian manufacturers are forced to ship large switchboards offshore for testing, adding cost, delay and risk – or to limit innovation altogether.

Lucy Finlay, who leads standards and regulatory engagement for Schneider Electric across the Pacific, placed this challenge squarely in the context of Australia's energy transition. Electrification of buildings, large‑scale deployment of rooftop solar, electric vehicle charging infrastructure and data centres are fundamentally changing how electricity flows through the system. Switchboards are no longer passive assets; they are managing bi‑directional power, higher fault levels, power electronics and, increasingly, direct current. New requirements in the National Construction Code, including EV distribution boards, are already driving increased demand for tested equipment.

Finlay warned that without local testing capability, Australia risks losing the ability to confidently validate new technologies and shape standards based on real‑world evidence, instead relying on overseas assumptions that may not reflect Australian conditions.

From the perspective of manufacturers, the consequences of this gap were described bluntly by Scott Emerson, speaking on behalf of the switchboard manufacturing sector through the National Electrical Switchboard Manufacturers Association. He told the forum that the absence of high‑power testing capability is now directly constraining innovation. Australia has always been great at new ideas, but we need the ability to complete the process without the onerous expense of having to ship things offshore for this testing.

In his words, "there's a limit to the innovation" without access to testing. As a result, "most of our manufacturers are aligning with larger international modular systems where they could simply buy parts, follow an instruction book, and there is an absolute loss of innovation and further development here in Australia." Emerson captured the shift starkly: "We’re just going to follow the Meccano set, unfortunately."

That shift has long‑term consequences. When local manufacturers cannot test new designs, materials or configurations, they are pushed towards assembling pre-approved systems rather than engineering solutions tailored to Australian conditions. Innovation moves offshore, along with the skills, intellectual property and economic value that go with it. Over time, Australia risks becoming a consumer of electrical technology rather than a contributor to it.

Dr Kerry Williams, Director of K‑Bik Power and Professor of Industry Practice in Power Systems at Queensland University of Technology, brought the discussion back to safety and reliability. Drawing on decades of forensic investigation and system analysis, he reminded the forum that high‑current testing is not about theoretical compliance, but about preventing failures that have real consequences.

Arc flashes, fires, unplanned outages and cascading system failures are often traced back to equipment that was never properly proven under worst‑case fault conditions. Modelling and assessment have their place, but they cannot substitute for physical testing at scale. As networks and industrial users demand higher reliability from equipment expected to operate for 40 years or more, the absence of domestic testing undermines confidence in both new installations and life‑extension decisions for ageing assets.

Martin Mulcahy, who led operations at the Lane Cove Test Station for more than a decade, provided a stark reminder of what Australia once had: the ability to perform full high‑power type testing across a wide range of equipment, supported by a deeply skilled workforce.

Lane Cove was not just a test site; it was a training ground where engineers, technicians and apprentices learned, firsthand, what short‑circuit forces and fault energy actually look like. That experiential knowledge is irreplaceable, and rebuilding it would take years.

Taken together, the speakers painted a picture that should concern policymakers as much as industry. In the absence of domestic high‑power testing capability, Australian manufacturers are increasingly forced to rely on overseas facilities to prove product performance and compliance.

This reliance comes at a significant cost. Access to international testing facilities is expensive, testing queues are long due to global demand, and the logistics of shipping large, complex equipment offshore add further delay and risk. Faced with these barriers, many manufacturers are either sending fewer products for testing or abandoning innovation altogether. Smaller firms, unable to absorb the cost, time and uncertainty, are particularly affected, leading to reduced Australian value‑adding and a steady erosion of local technical capability. The longer this situation persists, the harder it will be to reverse.

This is not an argument for reopening Lane Cove. That site is gone, and it will not return. Nor is it an argument for nostalgia. It is an argument for recognising that high‑power testing is strategic infrastructure. Other countries treat it as such, understanding that safety, standards credibility and industrial resilience depend on independent verification capability.

The forum concluded that doing nothing is no longer a neutral option. Over the next five to 10 years, the absence of domestic high‑power testing will increasingly constrain standards development, slow project delivery, undermine confidence in compliance and push more manufacturing offshore. In a world of supply‑chain disruption and geopolitical uncertainty, that is a risk Australia can ill afford.

The forum made clear that recognising the problem is only the first step. Participants were advised that, if supported by industry, the next step would be the establishment of a dedicated steering committee to take the concept of a replacement high‑power test facility forward in a structured and credible way.

Australian Industry Group believes that this would not be a policy exercise or a narrow technical working group, but the early formation of what is, in effect, a complex startup venture. Success would depend on assembling a leadership group with a rare mix of skills and industry backgrounds. This would include senior figures with deep experience in electrical product manufacturing, component supply and distribution, high‑power testing, system design and standards, alongside executives who understand commercial risk, capital investment, governance and long‑term operational sustainability.

Critically, leadership would be required from someone with the credibility to operate at board and government level, combined with practical exposure to power engineering, testing environments and large‑scale electrical systems. Fundamental questions would need to be confronted early, including ownership and governance models, funding and co‑investment pathways, site selection, workforce capability, accreditation, and the long‑term financial and technical viability of the facility.

Rebuilding this capability will be complex and time‑consuming, but without a disciplined, industry‑led approach, Australia risks allowing a critical national capability to fade permanently rather than deliberately rebuilding it for the next generation.

A significant early challenge in establishing such a steering committee will be securing the in‑kind and financial resources needed to support effective leadership and a capable secretariat. This includes access to senior industry figures willing to contribute time and expertise, technical specialists with testing and system design experience, and organisations prepared to support the foundational analytical, commercial and governance work.

Without this initial investment in leadership capacity and coordination, even a well‑intentioned steering committee risks lacking the authority, expertise and credibility required to move from concept to delivery.

For further information please contact James Thomson.