UPDATE: Scotty surrenders to urban luvvies, Rupert Murdoch, green extremists and China:
Scott Morrison has issued a rallying cry for the nation to address the challenge of climate change “together”, saying reducing emissions is now a question of “how, not if”.
Ahead of critical talks with Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce to hash out a net-zero by 2050 deal, the Prime Minister said there were “big opportunities” for regional and rural Australia.
“Addressing climate change is a challenge that we must do together. As Prime Minister, it is my job to bring people together on dealing with this big change. The world is moving into a new energy economy. We all know that,” Mr Morrison said on Monday morning.
“My government is committed to ensuring that rural and regional Australia transitions to this new energy economy in the future stronger, with their jobs and communities intact and they can look forward with confidence and plan for the future with confidence,” he said.
“We’ve got to come together on this issue. My government will come together on this issue. The country will come together on issue and we will tackle the challenges, just like we have tackled those challenges before this.”
Yes, because “renewable energy” has been such a great “success” in Europe and the UK, hasn’t it? (◔_◔)
At least they have the option of getting power from their neighbours, an option which is not available to Australia.
We are governed by effing morons in this country, not the least of them being ScoMo.
really.
we have had both Deloitte Access economics and now the BCA say exactly the opposite thing.
Renewables are easily the cheapest energy source at present and they will only lengthen.
This is very 1984ish. climate deniers are always saying black is white
On which planet, Homer?
https://joannenova.com.au/2021/10/attempt-to-change-worlds-weather-puts-650000-australian-jobs-at-risk-from-net-zero-fantasy/
ScoMo’s treachery is this matter is totally consistent with his past behaviour e.g. his handling of Covid as per James Allan’s demolition.
https://spectator.com.au/2021/10/scomos-to-blame-nobody-else/
I suspect Morrison has been told by his superiors just exactly what will be done to punish Australia if we don’t voluntarily commit green suicide.
Perhaps he thinks surrender is preferable to total destruction.
The idea of putting a 16-page wraparound at the front of News Corp’s tabloids today came from the top – and I don’t mean Rupert Murdoch, who has spent 60+ years building the News Corp global empire.
It’s always the third generation, isn’t it? Rupert can blame his idiot children for sweeping away the credibility of the News Corp empire by suddenly signing up as a global propaganda megaphone for the political left’s dumb, infantile junk science of global warmening.
You watch all of the Murdoch chattels like Sky News, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal suddenly fall into line and signal to their audiences that they can’t be believed on ANYTHING.
The biggest laugh is that News in Australia nominated one of its biggest stars, Joe Hildebrand, to play the role of Judas in torching the old man’s empire.
This is the dumbest self-immolation I have seen by any news organisation in a lifetime in journalism.
Absolutely, Tom. A month ago I suspected something like this was coming when News Australasia chief Michael Miller announced a ‘special editorial project’ to ‘inform’ Australians what they ‘needed’ to do to save the planet. Excerpt:
As usual, the Libs chasing policies which are at odds with the platform they took to the election. No mandate for this, all of it being imposed on the normies without being tested at the ballot box.
At least the other liars party came out and said it publicly at one stage, you know, “once we get in, we’ll change it all”.
Fat Bastard may not be pristine, but he at least provides us with a means to “vote the sitting member last”
Well I’ll tell you what’s coming for Scumbag Morrison and his putrid party….zero seats.
Oh that will be sweet…..very sweet.
And then they will wonder why they lost, Cassie.
At least publicly.
Privately the SFL will realise that they backed the wrong horses (renewable energy, supporting or doing nothing about tyrannical state premiers, etc.), and their conservative/right base has punished them for it, but they will never admit it.
Why vote Liberal when they are virtually identical to, or worse than, Labor/Greens?
Non Compos Mentis
Renewables are easily the cheapest energy source at present and they will only lengthen.
Excellllentt! Now we can abolish all the subsidies to Ruinable (Unreliable) Energy. That will save billions a year.
Then add a requirement for Ruinables to guarantee supply over specific (bid for) periods and the world will be sweet.
Morrison has completely forgotten Australians completely rejected carbon blah at the last Federal election.
What is wrong with the liberal party?
CL
solar is by far the cheapest energy source, then come windpower , both a still declining. old coal then comes along followed by gas. New coal is twice as expensive as old coal and takes 8 years to build and nuclear is not in the race even with a price on carbon.
It might be different on Mars where you live but not here in Australia. Try reading the papers I told you about. Net zero emissions creates jobs, stopping it destroys them.
The biggest load of cobblers I have ever read.
Cheap in this case is a measure of the government of the day’s willingness to tax and spend on subsidies. It is NOT a measure of the actual cost of producing the electricity.
Those subsidies can be increased, decreased or removed altogether at a whim.
Absent the subsidies and “renewable” is the dearest energy source.
Tim Blair:
Nothing Green Ever Works: the perfect six-step environmental virtue loop
One: Britain goes big on wind turbines in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from traditional power sources.
Two: The wind don’t blow and the power don’t flow.
Three: A subsequent massive increase in demand for natural gas as a power source drives wholesale gas prices through the roof.
Four: CF Fertilisers, a US-owned British fertiliser business that also produces carbon dioxide for commercial use, suspends production because high gas prices have made the business unprofitable.
Five: Carbon dioxide is a required component for meat packaging. Without reliable supplies of commercial carbon dioxide, Britain faces a food shortage.
Six: The British government, which spent millions of pounds to cut carbon dioxide emissions, will now give millions of pounds to CF Fertilisers so it can produce carbon dioxide.
Perfect.
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/nothing-green-ever-works-the-perfect-sixstep-environmental-virtue-loop/news-story/8914717dcdf5b1ef97d61ec507e559f5
Lee says:
11 October, 2021 at 3:38 pm
Not Trampis says:
11 October, 2021 at 3:09 pm
The biggest load of cobblers I have ever read.
You are flattering the fool. He has no comprehension that reliable, continuous, power is essential to operate a modern industrial society. Non Compos Mentis must own a huge collection of bridges in various locations. And is friends with many a Nigerian prince.
If you ignore capital costs, and also ignore the cleanup costs afterwards, and if you also buy expensive storage technology.
Fascinating the way Keynesian zero interest rates and the associated money printing just conveniently lead towards one particular outcome.
solar is by far the cheapest energy on any basis.
Tel have a look at the CSIRO comparisons. It isn’t as unreliable as coal fired power stations either. Terrible how a unit drops out once every three days. Worse on very hot days when you need the energy which is why AEMO is always worried.
If you are going to talk about Europe you really need to talk about gas which somehow is missing in the story. funny about that.
Non Compos Mentis
It isn’t as unreliable as coal fired power stations either.
Indeed. Nothing says reliability like dropping out whenever a cloud passes over!
NCM: that’s sarcasm, in case you are indeed stupid enough to think that I was agreeing with you.
Non Compos Mentis
If you are going to talk about Europe you really need to talk about gas which somehow is missing in the story. funny about that.
Gas is somehow also missing in Europe. Funny about that.
PS, do you support expanded gas exploration and development in Australia?
Bob Murphy has an interesting analogy: no one ever called for Jimmy Olsen when facing a spot of bother.
Point is that merely the act of blaming coal and gas for outages is already admitting that solar and wind can’t handle the load.
How do you want to compare reliability? Let’s go by average power output as percent of nameplate capacity … coal can handle 80% to 90% while wind is delivering around 30% and perhaps if you are very generous 40%, but still not in the ballpark. How about counting the number of outages? Sure … solar has an outage once per day and an additional outage on every heavily cloudy day as well. Feel free to select an alternative metric, provided we apply the same criteria to both sources. Diesel is the best in terms of reliability, but the fuel costs more than coal.
Those CSIRO papers Homer refers to implicitly assume all the subsidies and preferred buyer status, plus imposts on fossil fuels continue. That is how it Ari vex at its desired answer. CSIRO should not have an economics branch, the feds already has ABARES, and this is an example why it shouldn’t. It isn’t in its DNA.
Coal fired power stations are unreliable. As I said a unit breaks down every three days on average. It is much worse on very hot days when demand is high. Roof top solar has been a great help in changing the peak of demand.
Renewables cannot offset this at present because capacity is not there. We shall be okay when it is. It is amazing some ‘intellectuals’ here think all wind farms and solar farms are in the same place. Hint the clouds are different all over the continent.
Tel,
i think you are confusing when solar operators are toll to cut power at present.
Non Compos Mentis
You forgot to mention storage for when the sun don’t shine and the wind don’t blow.
Why don’t you do an empirical experiment? Set your house up with adequate capacity, and cut yourself off from the grid. Come back in 12 months, and report how you went. For the sake of intellectual honesty, do NOT accept any of the currently available subsidies for installing solar. Do you favour lead-acid batteries (Lead! How dare you! Acid! Environmental vandal!) or lithium (Child slave labour in the Congo! How dare you! Don’t forget to site it carefully, well away from the house) for storage?
oh dear we now have someone who believes the private sector is wasting money on all the batteries they are builing. Funny how they can only store power if there is excess power.
Two more things about the coal fired power stations that no-one wants to build.
They do not reflect the true price of coal. coal creates negative externalities which can only be overcome with a price on carbon. Arthur Pigou was the original architect of this way back when.
Coal like nuclear power is wholly reliant om base load power. This means the plant has to be on all the time which means vastly excess power at night ( where they would lose money.) This made a little sense when the plants were owned by the State government. It makes no sense when it is owned by the private sector. What they want is dispatchable power. coal plants cannot do this as it takes about 30 minutes to start or close such a plant.
Only Luddites support such plants. Certainly no public company wants to build one.
One interesting thing from the BCA paper on net zero emissions is how the regions are the big winners from it.
Non Compos Mentis
coal creates negative externalities which can only be overcome with a price on carbon.
Ruinables also create negative externalities. Child slaves in the Congo, lakes of toxic pollutants in Chynerr. But, as the “progressives” seem to think “Out of sight, out of mind”.
Coal like nuclear power is wholly reliant om base load power.
So is modern civilisation. PS: I like the “om” in there, it demonstrates the depth of your thought.
One interesting thing from the BCA paper on net zero emissions is how the regions are the big winners from it.
This is your chance to buy a new bridge for your collection. Do you have one in San Francisco yet? I got a tip from a friend about one coming on the market. Contact Prince Ilovva da Munni in Nigeria for the details …
PS: Not going to do the big empirical experiment? Lack confidence in your prognostications? Or just plain pathetically p1ssweak?
he thinks the batteries are big enough to supply power x time rather than FCAS?
and that coal is unreliable?
what a befuddled idiot
that is the dumbest thing I ever heard
you’re not into Elec Eng much are you?
Hahahahahaha!
There are as of this very moment, 1002 coal fired power plants around the world under construction, in pre-permit, permitted and announced. There are 6,593 in operation.
The world is currently adding 15% to its total of coal fired power, maybe they don’t really want to do it but something is forcing them. Could it be reality?
Hmm let us try and clear up the confusion.
first of all we are talking about Australia not the world. and you are confusing units and power stations.
The next thing is batteries are not a substitute for power stations not that anyone said they were. They merely soak up all the excess energy from renewables.
When the private sector own the energy sector they want dispatchable power b not baseload matching demand to supply and all that.
It is in most AEMO papers.
Last thing is most ignorant people confuse the wholesale sector with the retail sector. guess who di it here.
Non Compos Mentis
The next thing is batteries are not a substitute for power stations not that anyone said they were.
When the wind ain’t blowing, and the sun ain’t shining, and coal fired stations are gone, and environmentalists prevent gas exploration and development and new hydro, they are all that is left.
But you are correct, they are NOT a substitute for power stations.
You forgot to respond about what is your position on gas exploration and development. And don’t forget to tell us what you think (if you actually do think) about fracking.
PS, not only does the ” private sector … want dispatchable power”, so do the customers. Ruinables in their current state of development cannot guarantee that. Neither can any feasible quantity of batteries. So, again, what is your position on gas, including fracking?
Or nukes?
Homer.
Please, just stop posting comments here or anywhere else. It embarrasses humanity. The internet is forever and the idea that future generations will read your comments to get an idea of who we were. That’s just too awful to think about as it’s unfair on the rest of us.
Australia is a large continent. When the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining merely shows the stupidity of the person saying that.
I let the market decide whether they want gas or not. Producers do because of high prices but consumers do not for the very same reason.
Fracking has been shown to have negative effects on water supply so no I do not support it. Neither do many farmers!.
As for Nuclear power. It takes 15 years to build the power station that would be 4 times as expensive than solar or wind. sounds mad to rational people
Batteries only work when there is excess energy from renewables. They are though the best example of dispatchable energy around. the tesla battery was one of the main reasons why wholesale energy prices fell after the system was being gamed previously.
Non Compos Mentis
Australia is a large continent. When the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining merely shows the stupidity of the person saying that.
We all realise that your capacity for holistic thought is limited, but last time I looked, Australia is not covered in a web of interlinked transmission lines, allowing the solar power generated west of Alice Springs to be sent (less transmission losses) to Sydney, and the wind power generated on the Nullarbor plain to be sent (less the losses) to Brisbane when needed. When were these lines constructed?
As for your fantasy that batteries can cover the gaps, get your hand off it, you’ll go blind.
I let the market decide whether they want gas or not. Producers do because of high prices but consumers do not for the very same reason.
What a gutless response, you are too frightened to express a firm opinion. When there is no power from wind, solar and batteries, the market will decide, and Ruinables will be anathema.
Do you agree that all subsidies for Ruinables should be removed, now that they are the cheapest form of power? Or, like St Augustine, do you want Ruinable purity, but not just yet?
There is a large difference between the cost of a marginal megawatt hour and a truly useful one. While wind and solar are cheap on a marginal basis you need to factor in cost of storage and backup which makes them expensive.
Grid connected batteries are only used to scam the pricing difference at various times. charge when electricity is cheap and discharge at expensive rates. Great scam, even better if you can claim they are charged by “green” methods.
You need roughly 25 Gigawatts on average to run Australia (varies from about 18GW to 32 GW or so) or about 600 GW-hours per 24 hours. Working on really good lithium batteries (200W-h/kg) you’ll need a 3 million tonne battery (without control, cooling etc). For a few days say 15 millions tonnes of battery.
LOL!
Would that be “the market” that has been utterly corrupted by taxpayer-funded subsidies directed by the government towards supposedly “cheaper” renewables?
News Corpse are definitely into this hook, line and sinker as of now. Check today’s news.com.au homepage for evidence. Unbelievable
Really?
Weather patterns in Australia function in about 1,000 square k blocks. It’s a large area and the cost of setting up energy catchments, such as plastic panels and propellers on sticks would be prohibitive. There’s nothing cheap about diffuse renewballs, you imbecile.
“The market” wouldn’t even decide on gas. “The market” would decide on coal as it’s dirt cheap in Australia. In fact, brown coal is virtually limitless and almost free as it has not internationally traded.
This is a very stoopid comment, but I expect it from you, so no biggie.
Fracking has not been shown to do any of that because fracking occurs below the water table.
You read this at the Quiggator’s site. It’s total bullshit, especially once production is standardized.
Gee, really? Who knew?
You laughable twat. To provide enough energy for an industrial civilization we require masses of energy and even more down the track. Your batteries will barely light a flashlight than an entire civilization. Stop being a clown.
Really? The tesla battery provided enough energy to supply all of Australia for decades right?
Homer, you’re delusional and you’re hallucinating more and more these days, which is quite worrying.
Good to see Eyrie here. He’s a wonderfully talented multifaceted engineer. Earlier this morning he was a nuclear engineer, early afternoon a world renowned microbiologist and now an electrical engineer. There’s literally nothing he can’t do.
JC
On the subject of gas, I suspect that Non Compos Mentis (Homer) is terrified that if he offers any personal support for gas, then Stepford will repeat his performance on Phat Pussy, and become Homer’s personal Zampolit, criticising in detail everything Homer writes. Stepford destroyed munty’s blog, and would do the same again to Homer. It might be amusing to watch, but it would de-rail CL’s blog too.
JC
On the subject of gas, I suspect that Non Compos Mentis (Homer) is terrified that if he offers any personal support for gas, then Stepford will repeat his performance on Phat Pussy, and become Homer’s personal Zampolit, criticising in detail everything Homer writes. Stepford destroyed munty’s blog, and would do the same again to Homer. It might be amusing to watch, but it would de-rail CL’s blog too.
Regardless, Homer is an idiot.
That part is not really a scam though, I mean suppose I buy BHP shares when the market is down and sell later when the market is back up … I can make money, and it’s not like I scammed anybody. The thing is that storing some share paperwork in your desk drawer is easy enough, while storing gigawatt hours of electricity is a challenge … but if you can do it then it’s not a scam.
Yeah, that part is the expensive bit, but watch where I’m going with this (nothing up my sleeve). Zero interest loans from the government money printer and never pay it back (eyebrow, eyebrow) now that 3 million tonne battery pops up out of nowhere. OK, now we are talking about a scam … not in the way electricity is bought and sold (although that is a very distorted market thanks to RET) but in the way that capital costs are handled. There’s your real problem.
Nothing a few extra zero interest rate money printed loans can’t fix.
Let’s see … the unreliable stop/start renewables are very cheap after you have paid for: the solar cells, the inverters and power electronics; the windmills; the batteries for storage; the transmission lines all over Australia; and a control system to hold it all together … after that very cheap … because it’s all based on ignoring capital costs.
after that very cheap … because it’s all based on ignoring capital costs.
On that basis, nuclear is also quite cheap (you could argue that the fuel rods are also a capital cost), and has the advantage of continuous transmission.
Coal and gas, however, still have those pesky fuel costs.
Nuclear is hated by the Greens for ideological reasons and they don’t even discuss the economics of it.
There’s a fundamental trust problem in as much as nuclear requires constant money spent on safety and maintenance, as well as clean up costs afterwards and you need to find an operator who really will spend that money and do that cleanup. There is an endless incentive to just stretch out the design life a little bit more, and a little bit more, because might as well make one more week of profits before it gets shut down and we need to clean the thing up. We have the engineering technology, we just don’t have the necessary rule of law to ensure the job gets done properly.
Failing that … drive out to the middle of South Australia, dig a big pit and stick the thing in the bottom of a massive pool of salt water and then perhaps you have some fallback options.
Neither solar nor wind farms are not all congregated together so saying if the sun dies not shine or the wind does not blow is very stupid.
however you do put forward a problem with the electricity system. It is still operating on a centralised system where coal fired power stations rule. One of the great beauties of renewables is that they are decentralised. Read the BCA paper.
Batteries can do the work if they are large enough and if the number increases. That is all in the pipeline.
Allowing the market to work is an anathema to climate deniers.
subsidies is a second best solution. The best by a mile is a price on carbon which takes into account the negative externalities ( another subject you clearly have no idea about.)
Why have essentially all public companies disavowed any thought about building coal fired power stations. Are you arguing they do not look at certain costs?
As for the Tesla battery the argument is the reduced wholesale prices which was being gamed previously. Once they provided energy at vastly reduced prices the others were forced to follow.
If you understood markets it would be easy to understand.