JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Victorians to pay $2300 each, Queenslanders $5600 to make “renewables” target

Did anyone ask the voters if they wanted to spend $10 – $20k per family on a program to change the weather?

Renewables are all over the media in Oz. Suddenly free energy has a cost. Before SA knocked itself out, mainstream pundits talked of “ambitious”  targets, now the term is “aggressive”.

We nationally have an obscene 23% “renewables” target — burning billions so our great grandchildren might be a millionth of a degree cooler. But some of our states are even crazier (SA, Victoria, and Queensland) and the Federal Minister for Energy is telling the nuttier ones off, pointing out the cosmic cost of achieving their even higher goals.

Josh Frydenberg sounds halfway sensible:

“Victorians for years have enjoyed some of the lowest energy prices across the country, which has created jobs, investment and growth. But now Victorians, like other Labor states, are being threatened with higher prices to fund ill-­considered renewable energy targets where there is no practical and realistic road map to get there.”  — The Australian

The preliminary estimate from Mr Frydenberg’s department:

The capital cost of the extra ­renewable capacity would be least $14bn in Victoria and $27bn in Queensland, making up a total of $41bn, according to the pre­liminary estimate prepared in ­Canberra.

Victorian Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio said in June that ­consumers would pay only “cents per week” for that state’s ­additional target.

That’s $2300 per man woman and child in Victoria and $5600 per Queenslander.

Did anyone ask the voters if they wanted to spend $10 – $20k per family on a program to change the weather?

Let’s give that a go and find out what percentage of Australian families would prefer to buy something else, like a bathroom, a new hip, a holiday, or a boat?  Can we have a plebiscite on that?

But Frydenberg also says  the states “should accept the national target instead”. Bollockspeak, says Jo. States should do their own thing and let the free market figure it out. They should do something radical like a cost-benefit analysis on using solar panels to stop the sea rising.  The first state to dump renewables and offer cheap continuous coal or nukes will reap the rewards as businesses pull up stakes and move. That state will grow rich, be fully employed and be able to afford bigger, better national parks and grand indulgences like saving spotted toads, rare anemone, and whatever they fancy.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (109 votes cast)
Victorians to pay $2300 each, Queenslanders $5600 to make "renewables" target, 9.6 out of 10 based on 109 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/h2h9pyk

161 comments to Victorians to pay $2300 each, Queenslanders $5600 to make “renewables” target

  • #
    michael hart

    I guess it’s all our fault. If we had cured cancer and built a cellphone than can fly you to the moon then nobody would would put money into the energy unbelievables. I’m sorry. I’ll try harder next time.

    102

    • #
      Albert

      In 60 years we went from the first flight to playing golf on the moon and we never needed ‘renewables’
      Thanks Jo, I live in Queensland and this is shocking news from you

      142

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        We should call this period of time “the Green Dark Ages”, where reactionaism, communism and eco-fascism have all surfaced, aided and abetted by our own state & federal govts….

        People should be having harsh words with their local members, so its a conversation they really remember for a lonnnng time…and motivates them to stop the rot because the electorate is crank as….

        262

        • #
          Albert

          Well said !

          52

        • #
          Mark D.

          I think “Dark Green” rolls off the tongue better.

          82

        • #
          Mark D.

          “Dark Green Age” that is

          82

        • #
          Olaf Koenders

          Voting is a moron’s game.

          We KNOW they’ll secretly pass legislation that they haven’t even discussed with us – the Government. If they order or desire by force for me to perform something for them in any way, considering that slavery is unlawful in this country, I’ll send them the bill for my services – which includes having to muck about and pay for their rubbish “renewable” targets.

          I’ll send one to DiCaprio as well. Thanks to him my medical bills have risen, because he makes me sick.

          122

        • #
          PeterS

          Good idea. Until that happens we can say green (not orange) is the new black(out). There’s only one problem though. If voters of today are indeed starting to wake up then we all better stop voting for ALP, Greens and Liberal and start voting for another party all together. Otherwise it will be a very long time before we can call this the Green Dark Ages.

          72

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          I expect it to be referred to as the age of the rule of ignorance. That is if the libraries do not get burnt.

          30

        • #

          I think calling it the ‘Green Dark Ages’ is giving too much credit to their arguments that this has anything to do with truly ‘Green’ issues; unless we are talking about the color of U$D’s :) Unfortunately though, you are quite correct. We only have three political parties (LNP, Labor, Greens) with core momentum, and with the ability to truly craft policy and associated debates regarding national political evolution, and all three have sold us out on this fraud.

          Is there ANY OTHER issue in Australia history, which was majorly divisive and not supported by a critical mass of the public, which has dogmatically infected the leadership of two of them (LNP and Labor) to turn against the wishes of a large portion of their voter base? I can’t think of any other issue which seems to have been able to capture the policy setting segments of all major parties, simply, and obviously because global governance and special interest groups such as the nascent Carbon Trading desks at Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan (et al) wish it to be so.

          This is shades of ENRON, though global in scope, and unlike ENRON’s carbon trading ambitions, this newly invigorated movement is quite successful where it matters in the lobbyist playgrounds known as Parliaments/Congress, not to mention fooling the ‘socialist’ hoard into thinking this is a left-wing social justice movement, when it is exactly the opposite; this is fascist, though National Socialism comes to mind if we replace the word National with Global. It is no wonder that the new U.N. Secretary General appointee António Guterres, was for six years the President of the Socialist International! Signs of the times.

          In 2012, António Guterres, as UN High Commissioner for Refugees, addressed the U.N. blamed the Mali Crisis on Climate Change (!), which was probably his JOB INTERVIEW to be eligible to become the new High Priest of the United Nations. The U.N. Troops apparently had to be sent in with automatic weapons to police the weather. We can all ignore the fact that strong storms and dust devils don’t scream Allahu Akbar whilst rampaging the countryside. Reality is of no consequence when Agenda 21 dictates the Terms of Reference for political and socio-economic analysis of the causes of crises.

          EXCERPT FROM 2008 CFR WHITE PAPER:
          International Institutions and Global Governance Program
          World Order in the 21st Century
          A New Initiative of the Council on Foreign Relations
          May 1, 2008

          The need for a reformed, robust system of multilateral cooperation has never been more obvious. Today’s global agenda is dominated by a host of issues—from terrorism to climate change to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction—that no single country, no matter how powerful, can address on its own. Tomorrow’s challenges and policy agendas will only be more transnational in scope. At the same time, existing multilateral institutions are increasingly divorced from global realities, hindering their capacity to deliver global public goods and mitigate global “bads.”

          The rise of transnational threats. While great power war will always be possible in a system of sovereign states, the principal foreign policy challenges of the twenty-first century are likely to be transnational threats—from terrorism to pandemics to climate change. Such challenges will necessitate new forms of institutionalized cooperation and pose particular challenges to the United States, historically ambivalent toward multilateral institutions. [sidestepped by Obama's non-treaty treaty ratification]

          Global Climate Change. New international institutions to mitigate the degradation of the global commons will likely be a defining feature of global governance in the twenty-first century. The global environmental agenda includes a broad array of oceanic, terrestrial, and atmospheric challenges, from the exhaustion of marine resources like fish stocks and coral reefs to deforestation and desertification, the loss of biodiversity and endangered species, air pollution, and the depletion of the ozone layer. Nowhere is the need for a new global compact more imperative, however, than in the case of climate change, which unless corrected will irrevocably alter the biosphere on which all humanity depends. Moreover, the effects of global warming are predicted to affect most dramatically some of the most fragile, poor and unstable developing countries that are least equipped to adapt. The program will work with CFR fellows in examining the institutional preconditions for a post-Kyoto framework agreement to which the United States and the major developing countries, including China, India, and Brazil, can agree, as well as a potential expansion of the Global Environmental Facility to create incentives for carbon-neutral development.
          - http://www.cfr.org/content/thinktank/CFR_Global%20_Governance_%20Program.pdf

          “Nowhere is the need for a new global compact more imperative, however, than in the case of climate change, which unless corrected will irrevocably alter the biosphere on which all humanity depends.” – Think of the imbecility of this statement; “climate change” of course being a constant dynamic of paleo-climate before fossil fuel use ever added another dynamic to CO2 composition of the atmosphere. The word “corrected” is here, used in replacement for “global warming” to ensure innocuous language, and is simply insulting to human intelligence.

          “incentives for carbon-neutral development.” – Codespeak for de-industrialization, industrial sabotage, financialized imperialism, and in the end equation, a neo-eugenics agenda that 20th Century fascists could only have dreamed of.

          FACT: Australian popular political representation and democracy is a mirage.
          FACT: Our sovereignty is of no importance to the leaders in our political system.
          FACT: Even our Executive branch, headed by QEII, is driving this new religion (Prince Charles: the kooky kingling)

          Malcolm Turnbull was the globalist Checkmate to neutralize over 200 years of experimentation in Australian Constitutional Monarchy and representative democracy. Turnbull has literally urinated all over every ancestor who has ever worked and fought to keep Australia Sovereign. We are now ruled by an offshore complex who would prefer us to become divided on social fault lines, rather than our combined social energy being expended against their subversive agendas, hence our national dialogue is now dominated by issues of limited practical importance.

          These agenda’s aren’t exactly hidden, as the most influential think tanks (such as the CFR, Chatham House, and closer to home, the Lowe Institute) constantly publish papers and issue policy directives to elected officials throughout the Anglosphere, declaring openly that ‘climate science’ needs to match their preconceived political, economic, and social wishes. These ‘experts’ then have their opinions weaponized by socialist captured state media, such as the ABC, and compliant corporate media (vast majority of whom rely on fund$ and patronage from banks such as Goldman Sachs, whom are the real drivers of the Carbon Indulgences fraud which will resurrect their zombie capital structures).

          Green Scientism is probably the best term to describe this trojan horse religious ideology which is designed to enthrone a new Technocratic Imperialism.

          R.I.P. Commonwealth of Australia.

          NOTE: Cynicism totally justified by the reality of our national situation.

          60

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            I guess if you were trying to enslave a whole planet, you might invent an artificial “crisis”, the pass Enabling Laws to allow you to pillage and burn the planets population to the ground…..if not freezing them to death with fuel poverty, or by deliberately formented wars to wipe each other out through getting both sides to hate each other….

            30

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            You know, for probably 5 years now I have been trying to tell people that there is no difference between liberal and labor – all are now controlled by the globalists…….

            “We only have three political parties (LNP, Labor, Greens) with core momentum, and with the ability to truly craft policy and associated debates regarding national political evolution, and all three have sold us out on this fraud.

            Is there ANY OTHER issue in Australia history, which was majorly divisive and not supported by a critical mass of the public, which has dogmatically infected the leadership of two of them (LNP and Labor) to turn against the wishes of a large portion of their voter base? ”

            No – because this has been planned for nearly 200 years by the globalists ( un-cooly also known as the occult “Illuminati” ) but also fits perfectly within Biblical prophecy

            30

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          The last epoch; 1970 to 2020; we could call it the Greenobscene.

          00

  • #
    David S

    The problem is that the federal government feels it needs to pay lip service to the AGW bogeyman. Why not just say we will have an indefinite halt on any assistance for renewables until their is both certainty on the science ( which there clearly is not) and some commercial basis for renewables. Unfortunately this government can’t be trusted to manage energy policy without feeling a need to placate the Greens. Otherwise I would suggest that energy should be declared an essential service ( which it is) and override the states ability to set their own targets.
    At least if it’s done on a federal basis the ridiculous speed that states are adopting renewables and forcing up prices and reducing reliability can be slowed.

    233

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      The reality is that the UN and its boot lickers ( most govts on the planet ) are propping up that arrogant, power hungry, Communist organization.

      If its cash dries up, it dies, and not a moment too soon…

      243

      • #
        Egor TheOne

        Bang on OriginalSteve. I second that motion!

        Its just not from ‘Unelected Nutters’ appeasement. Its also racketeering from ‘pretend’ true b’lvers on the Al Gore GravyTrain Express.

        Its the Old ‘Give us your money, and we will save your soul(in this case,the planet)’ Trick.

        Or the standard propaganda of some dud leftoid actor flogging a photo of a power station stack at sunset…..the old ‘make the harmless steam appear as black soot’ trick!

        All these CAGW and renewables rackets need to be put to the sword and its propagators sacked/ousted and prosecuted for scamming the system , and the sooner the better before we all end up back in the dark ages.

        142

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        If the cash dries up?

        At Climate Council, Comrade Tim is calling for urgent donations.

        And, David, in the last couple of weeks I have been seeing signs that the federal government is moving to a very different lip service.

        21

  • #
    Gordon

    The problem is the silent majority. NOBODY CARES!!!
    It is the same in Canada, the governments just spends,the public complains, nothing gets done.This green movement is just a polite way of taxing without appearing to tax.

    302

    • #

      People do care, I speak to people all the time that don’t want this waste. The problem is that the Left has lost it’s head and, afterall, it’s just other people’s money, just like with desal plants, paying out contract annulments (roads). Because Labor governments haven’t run out of other people’s money just yet, all is good.

      243

      • #
        Dennis

        Astute voters do want our nation managed in a business like way, to stop squandering our monies and borrowing more to spend in the traditional socialist way, and for petty party politics to be brushed aside or at least conducted behind closed doors.

        Younger people are not tied to the political parties that there parents and grandparents followed, often blindly, and want parliaments and local governments that build a better nation for us all.

        52

      • #
        Albert

        During the referendum to dump the Queen, it was revealed the duplication alone between the Feds and the States was costing us $31 billion per year and we do nothing but watch our country slide backwards

        121

        • #

          Funny thing is, when the State-Federal duplication issue is ever mentioned by pundits, it is always brought up in the context of removing power from the State Governments and moving/retaining it at the Federal level … when in my opinion, keeping the power at the State level and castrating the Federal Govt is the better option.

          It’s not like the centralized nature of Canberra has created any added efficiency, when we have 3 Parties that play politics with every issue they get their hands onto, until nothing is worked out, or the compromise is so darn weak and/or ridiculous that having done nothing at all was the better option.

          State Governments might be totally useless when they are run by Labor governments, but this is because welfarism has NEEDED to expand under such a heavy Federal Taxation regime. All Federal Taxation has really done, is pushed many of the state electorates towards voting to the left for handouts to make up for the loss of income and jobs.

          Point case, Tasmania, where I live, which was run into the ground by 15 years of a Labor government, with the last few years of this long stretch being a Green-Labor coalition which utterly ruined our State and chased off most of the remaining investment capital, but which debacle made way for Tasmanian’s to vote a Liberal Govt in for the first time in 15 years. So, I guess, the Greens do serve a purpose, perhaps to provide a reality check to any possible Labor swing voters looking to flirt with pro-business ideology.

          The Green’s are like the Ice Bucket Challenge of politics; to wake people up to the true nature of suicide politics.

          Long live the State governments! But may the people wake up and realize that keeping politicians honest and holding conservatives to their mandate, is more important than the darn football match – a tall ask in Australia, where the national energy expended on football and cricket every year, is 1,000,000 times more than people’s vectored concern towards the agendas of their politicians.

          20

      • #
        Angry

        This is why One Nation is popular and also why Trump will be POTUS….

        00

    • #
      Mark

      We do care Gordon. That is why we are so pissed of with Turnbull. Abbott was gradually killing off these climate fools. He had sacked Flannery and was closing the climate agencies. He was stripping money from the schemes and redirecting it. As soon as Turnbull came into office he returned money to the agancies.

      243

    • #
    • #
      Hivemind

      I think a bigger part of the problem is that nobody dares. If you look at the abuse that is heaped onto anybody that dares to point out the fraud that global warming has become; I mean, they had to change it’s name because it hasn’t warmed in 20 years.

      92

      • #

        Trouble with not daring to stand up and fight back is the same as it always is when being bullied. Staying silent doesn’t work, you still get beaten up and find all your pocket money gone. People are waking up to that fact. They are going along with it, giving it a go, but they’re still being hurt with more savage punishment promised for the future.

        This greenie nonsense was supposed to make life better. It was supposed to be cheaper and good for the environment. It’s none of those things.

        We have to stand up and fight back. There is no other way if you want the pain to stop. Gang-green bullying isn’t helping anybody and they are not going to stop doing it of their own accord, certainly not while there’s money and power in it for them. We need to take control and stop going along passively hoping the pain will end. It won’t!

        112

      • #
        Dennis

        I will not stand for socialism masquerading as environmentalism – PM Abbott

        121

        • #
          el gordo

          Hear Hear

          61

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          But there we see another part of the problem. The word “socialism” has been hijacked by the Marxists, and we have let them get away with it.

          Just like the use of the words “democratic” and ‘republic” in the titles of the Chinese and East German communist governments. And people are gullible enough to fall for it.

          20

    • #
      PeterS

      Then that just proves what I always believed – we the people (ie, voters) are to blame, not the governments the WE vote in. The only way to fix this is to vote for some other party that will displace the current major parties. It’s that simple. Otherwise we are all wasting our time. This is how democracy is supposed to work but it appears most of the people are too lazy to exercise it properly.

      72

      • #

        At the last Federal election, that’s exactly what people tried to do. They didn’t want Labor in, nor did they want to sanction Turnbull’s crap, so people voted for the likes of Hanson and others, or Abbott supporters, to show the Liberal’s what they thought of Turnbull.

        At the moment, there isn’t a viable alternative, until one arises (unlikely), this is what Australia has to put up with. For the time being, the Liberal party needs to grow a backbone, toss out Turnbull as a bad mistake and move back to what, and who, they are supposed to represent.

        92

        • #
          bobl

          Bemused, IMO this won’t happen until nearer the next election, the next leader of the Coalition will want to have the election in the honeymoon period. Look for an overthrow around 1 year out.

          IMO labor might get the treasury benches next in a minority government but they may well be facing a Lib/Nat/ON majority in the senate. As I predicted the voting changes in the senate did fix the rabble of the last seat BUT put that vote back to the electorates preferred minority candidates rather than the parties choice. The change that allows you to expire your vote means that you can avoid unintentional preference flows. Your vote ends if it doesn’t land on a candidate in 12 preferences. You can now say, Greens can’t have my vote – ever. Only wish you could do that in the HOR election.

          42

        • #
          PeterS

          You just proved my point. Of course there are viable alternatives and some voted for them hence the revival of One Nation. But it’s only a small and half-heated attempt by the public. The vast majority still voted either ALP+Greens or Liberal. In other words they voted as usual predominantly for the major parties, ie the lazy vote. If people really want a change then they have to stop voting for the major parties. It’s that simple. Otherwise, it will get worse and worse, just as in the boiling frog syndrome.

          60

          • #

            What you say is partly true, but the fact is that minor parties will never be able to govern. Even Labor has abandoned its traditional voter base, so it’s not just the Liberals wandering into the green wilderness. The problem is that the major parties have become captive to the Cultural Marxists and don’t have the gonads to tell them where to go.

            I don’t believe that either the Labor or the Liberal party would be in any way harmed at the ballot box by telling the Cultural Marxists to bugger off and that the party is returning to its roots. I’ll bet that the party that does this will win by a landslide. That will mean tossing out a number of Cultural Marxists members, but doing so won’t harm the party whatsoever.

            30

  • #
  • #
    Graeme No.3

    “Victorian Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio said in June that ­consumers would pay only “cents per week” for that state’s ­additional target.”
    This is the government that cancelled the East-West Link because it wouldn’t cost anything, and now find that the cost is over $1,000,000,000.

    I don’t know if it is possible but the Federal government should suspend the issuing of RECs. No subsidies means no renewables. If not that, then take the submarine contract off SA and award it to WA or NSW. That would have the additional benefit of Jay Weatherill leaving public life abruptly and ending his hysterical statements in public.

    280

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    My grandfather used make a joke about petrol in the car – when the fuel level was low, he’d say “hey lets go fast before it all runs out…”

    Joke sonus if we let the renewables sc*m have its day….

    Anyone with half a brain whould be backing away from renewables like it was the black ( green ) death

    Heres me thinking “scam” was a 4 letter word – its not, starts with “R”, has 10 letters….

    Renewables = #CensusFail

    132

  • #
    Neville

    This recent study on SLR shows that coastal land is increasing. Even the BBC is surprised.
    So why are we wasting countless billions $ on their CAGW nonsense? Oh and OZ only emits 1.3% of the planet’s co2 emissions.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/08/30/earths-surface-gaining-coastal-land-area-despite-sea-level-rise/

    82

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    We the silent majority can do something to stop labour , vote for one nation .

    181

    • #
      Dennis

      The truth is that One Nation will not become a major player any time soon. Please consider the history of One Nation since it commenced in the 1990s and where they are today. Then consider the Democratic Labor Party, the Australian Democrats, Palmer United and others that tried to take on the major parties and failed. ALA was until the last federal election the answer to the prayers of the hopefuls and they gained not one seat. Only the Greens have survived as a minor party with some influence, notably with the Australian Labor Party. So maybe One Nation will have some influence from time to time too, but to claim that One Nation is going to attract “the silent majority” is a waste of time and effort because of our political voting system and the power and influence of the major parties.

      33

      • #
        bobl

        The last election told the conservatives where to park their vote. Next election those disenfranchised conservatives or libertarians will KNOW where to park their vote. With that extra vote One Nation could be at 8 or 9 senators and maybe 2 HOR seats. The Libs are SOOOO fragile they can’t afford to ignore One Nation in QLD. With a HOR preference deal ON could gain even more HOR seats than that in QLD, such is the bush’s disfranchisement with being ignored by Lib/Nats.

        Unless the libs ditch Mal for a conservative, there will be a crisis next election. The Lib/Nats lurch to the left has not worked out well for the party.

        141

      • #
    • #
      Yonniestone

      One Nation is hugely popular in the Australian patriot movement, not because of any phobias or ‘isms’ but for the fact the leader of said party is speaking for them on their behalf, no ifs, buts, deals, backdowns, compromises, just the message conveyed with brutal honesty.

      Most professional people with solid higher education would be shocked just how much this apparent bogan element of society knows of whats going on politically here and the global arena, these everyday Aussies have also developed a scientific method in their madness of accepting failure of a dead end and going back to what they knew as solid evidence.

      Now tell me how many recent uni graduates would have the same humility in learning or even recognise that such a method actually exists outside the safe space of group think.

      40

  • #
    Dennis

    Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott once remarked that he would not stand for socialism masquerading as environmentalism.

    He also tried to convince his cabinet members that so called Renewable Energy Target should be lowered, that there should be due diligence, an independent audit of the BoM about misleading media releases referring to the weather and specifically claimed to be hottest ever periods that do not match BoM historic data records, and PM Abbott even wanted to close the Climate Change Commission which was rejected by a majority of cabinet ministers but they did agree to stopping funding to the Flannery operated Office of Climate Change.

    Unfortunately too many politicians are caught up in political games and related lobbying by wealth creators and leftists, and at this time only a minority have the best interests of the people they represent in mind.

    151

  • #
    Albert

    ”Did anyone ask the voters if they wanted to spend $10 – $20k per family on a program to change the weather?”
    Unfortunately ignorance abounds, at the last Federal election a Greenie was chanting ”save the barrier reef”, I asked the Greenie, ”how old is the barrier reef ?” She replied millions of years !

    131

    • #
      Olaf Koenders

      LOL. Hope she choked on that one.

      A follow up question would be: “How old is the climate then?”

      81

      • #
        Albert

        There has been climate change in our past during the Maunder minimum and the warm periods. Change is only when the weather has changed for 30 to 60 years. Today’s alarmist CC is only a change in weather

        40

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Echoing Albert echoing Jo: ”Did anyone ask the voters if they wanted to spend $10 – $20k per family on a program to change the weather?”

      Seems SA Premier Jay Weatherill loves asking voters how their money should be spent.

      http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/10/08/03/33/citizens-jury-to-discuss-sa-nuclear-dump

      Mr Weatherill says the jury will summarise the diversity of views that have already been expressed across the state.
      “It’s often said the people have lost trust in politics, but what if it’s the other way around,” Mr Weatherill told reporters today. “What if politicians have lost trust in people. That’s what this whole exercise is about. It’s about trusting ordinary, everyday citizens to look at complex issues and come up with wise judgments.”

      Chances of Jay Weatherill trusting ordinary, everyday citizens to look at the complex wind power issue and come up with wise judgements: … nil.

      00

      • #
        Angry

        “…..complex wind power issue……..”

        NO!

        It is very simple:-

        wind power is unreliable and what little it does produce is 10 times the cost of coal !

        Nothing simpler!!

        00

  • #
    el gordo

    We desperately need the MSM onside (particularly the ABC) to stop the madness, otherwise brainwashed politicians will continue making fools of themselves at our expense. Its good when someone like Uhlmann (AGW bias) is vilified by the zealots.

    ‘Uhlmann told Weekly Beast he was disappointed that some people immediately branded him as “anti-renewable or a climate change denier” just because he was pointing out that there are engineering problems associated with wind energy.

    Uhlmann: “Why wouldn’t we [at the ABC] be interested in what is going on in the South Australian energy market when there are a number of signals something is awry? And we took this cause up before the current blackout.”

    ‘Asked why, as political editor, he was spending so much time on this issue he said: “These are things that I would have thought a journalist would be interested in. This is an absolute legitimate line of inquiry. I find myself in a position where I have to defend myself from organisations like yours and Crikey.”

    Guardian

    92

    • #
      Griffo

      I have a dream that one day the ABC will move to SA and broadcast using unrelewable power alone and that their coffee machines will be equally constrained,fat chance in reality

      100

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I find leftoids are generally dim… a good mates’ missus has gone down slowly down the Socialist dark side, endorsing more and more useless causes-du-jours, but I gently lay the boot in ( so to speak ) in discussions about Klimat Chang becasue I refuse to be cowed by leftist nonsense.

      Until enough people are willing to risk friendships and relationships to speak up and hold back the nonsense, the rubbish wont stop.

      Kids too need to be actually told they are being lied to via the official curriculum.

      Until we dig in and actually fight back and cause enough grief for them to start shrieking at us, were not having an impact.

      We want them to say “Lay on, McDuff….”

      111

      • #
        Angry

        Absolutely!
        If they have any qualifications at all it is usually “Arts” or “Humanities”…..

        Nothing of substance.

        00

  • #

    Here in the UK I am pleased to report that one MP continues to speak out on this subject with knowledge and clarity. here is the link.

    51

  • #

    Here in the UK I am pleased to report that one MP continues to speak out on this subject with knowledge and clarity. here is the link.

    52

  • #
    Robdel

    The SA voters have not learnt their lesson yet. They need a sharper longer lesson before they revolt to boot out the present labgreen governments who are holding them hostage. Until that happens they will continue to suffer. And it serves them right for voting in those ecoloons. Victorians should be paying close attention to these developments as they are next in line.

    81

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Cant we get the SA govt sacked?

      Gross negligence like this left unpunished is not OK.

      71

    • #
      MudCrab

      Problem with us here in South Oz is that we are not a Convict State and hence do not have 200 odd years of experience with dealing with criminals.

      SA voting patterns have a habit of trusting the nice Mr Labor because he says nice things. Things slowly get worse but somehow it is not the nice Mr Labor’s fault, until one day the voters wake up and the entire State Bank is on fire.

      Even then, as the old nice Mr Labor slips aside to be replaced with a new nice Mr Labor a few months before the election, it is still not Labor’s fault.

      The voters don’t believe it and Labor are thrown out in a landslide.

      Problem then is that Mr and Mrs voter think “My work here is done” closely followed by “Hey, that nice Mr Labor has a point”. Labor get voted back after two terms and the rot slowly starts again.

      This isn’t helped by the fact that in recent years SA Liberals don’t believe they even deserve to win. Coming up to 2010 no one in Liberal land thought it was worth the effort and did nothing until about 5 months out of the election when it was noted that Rann was dropping in the polls. The Libs then did a massive rush job on the marginals and didn’t win them.

      (they did get a couple of massive swings to in seats no one had given a toss about – Sanderson in Adelaide got herself a 15% swing against a sitting member, basically be spending 18 months prior to the election doorknocking the entire seat and proving that voters will support people who actually show an interest in them. Unfortunately the Libs then drew the wrong conclusion – that Adelaide was now Pro-Lib – and then wondered why their rush job candidate for Federal Adelaide somehow didn’t get any votes)

      So why does SA continue to get Labor governments?

      - Labor are ‘nice’ and know how to put ‘nice’ people in the top job, so even when you know they have screwed up you still want to give them one more chance.
      - Liberal, with exceptions, have become either defeatist, complacent, or both
      and most importantly,
      - We are not a Convict State and a lot more trusting.

      20

    • #
      Angry

      The rest of Australia should not bail out SA with their electricity issues of their own making.

      Let them face the consequences of their actions and sit in the dark !

      00

  • #
    TdeF

    This is not just about the science ignorant Greens, like Di Natalie who wanted Whyalla to make steel but wants to stop the use of coal. Steel is made from coal.

    No, it is about vengeance for the sale of Power assets by Liberal governments, just as the NBN was an attempt to take over the telephones and all they mean today. The shutting of Hazelwood would be sweet revenge for Labor. Prior to that the only blackouts we had were deliberate shutdowns by militant unions. Hazelwood was sold and the staff numbers reduced x4. Labor wants revenge using public money. Similarly with the sale of Telstra. In VIctoria, the new Labor Andrews government has fired everyone in the way of a UFU takeover of the CFA. It cost Labor the Federal election, but debts have to be paid. Soon the 60,000 CFA members will be forced to join the firefighter’s union, adding $36million to Union income. Is it about fire security? No.

    As the Royal Commission discovered, in Canberra Union leaders decide the cost of a concrete pour, not the supplier. Unions and their paid Labor leaders decide what we pay for electricity, telephones, concrete and delivery. Bill Shorten himself took the workers at cannery SPC out on strike as the new fruit came in, a once a year crisis event. The result was that wages were doubled and half the workers fired.

    This year all truck drivers were forced to join a union and unions would decide what family members paid each other. This was stopped. This is not at all about the economy or energy security or saving the planet. This is all about Union control of our society and all the services. You will pay for electricity what the unions decide. Of course it is not about the temperature of the planet. It never was.

    191

    • #
      TdeF

      To be clearer, this is no more about saving the planet than the NBN was about improving the internet, phones, mobiles, facebook, google, websites or blogs. It is about control. Sure all but 8 MPs are dependent on Green votes. Malcolm thought he could have another coup with a secret alliance with the Greens, which was none too secret. That would have wiped out Labor. Now perhaps he will not trust politicians but he is late to the game.

      No as Adam Bandt, avowed communist would say, this is literally about control of the means of production, just as the NBN offered state control of the media. $100bn on telephone lines. $100Bn on windmills. $100Bn on a Very Fast Train. Then you have Malcolm’s favorites, a Republic and his Emissions Trading Scheme.

      This is all about spending your money, big government and getting control of the major levers in modern society. Electricity can bring our society to its knees, as South Australia knows. Daniel Andrew’s Victoria is on the same path. Of course it is all nominally about fairness, work safety, equality and looking after the poorest workers, as the criminal President of the ALP and HSU Michael Williamson did so well. It is also about saving the planet, even if that does not make any sense at all. It sounds good. Thousands of dangerous, unpredictable, erratic windmills then. Power to the people.

      111

      • #
        toorightmate

        TdeF,
        NBN will cost each family in Australia about $30,000 to install. Aren’t we lucky?
        When we have all paid that little lump of capital, we can then put our hands in our pockets and pay the connection fee.

        61

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          We cant get NBN for another 3 years, but I frankly dont care…I have more interstingthings to do that download movies or read farcebook.

          FYI – you only need about a 1 MB/s link to do school homework, less if truth be old. Dont fall for the “we need high speed” nonsense. Its all so lame videos can play…

          Kids will miss out on life if they spend too much time online, not out in the real world….oh and make sure you shut off the wifi at 6pm so people spend time together.

          61

        • #
          Dennis

          Somebody remarked to the technicians that they should not cut corners with the NBN and one replied that they can’t.

          30

        • #
          David Maddison

          I am a heavy internet user and tech savvy plus I watch many HD videos on YouTube and I am completely happy with ADSL2+. I see no need for NBN, especially when wireless 5G technology is rolled out which is perhaps 100 times faster than NBN and will render it largely obsolete.

          70

    • #
      TdeF

      On Hazelwood, the original sale was $2.5Bn in 1996. Now the new French owners will shut it if we pay, to save the planet of course. At a guess 5% pa or $110million a year to NOT generate power. Our four unused desalination plants (Gold Coast, Sydney, Melbourne Adelaide) are costing over $100Bn including interest on the loans plus the maintenance staff to not be used. Maybe 200 full time staff and $20Million a year over 20 years, $400million to not make water. Again the French.

      They must see us as mugs, prepared to pay us to buy stuff we do not need and then pay to maintain them in case they are needed while we pay them off over 25 years. In Victoria the original Tullamarine Citylink contract ended and we the people own the freeway but the charges continue because the government likes the income. So we are paying a private company for the right to drive on our own road plus a state tax for doing so. A huge money go round.

      Like an $800Million North South pipe line in Victoria which was used once, at the peak of the flood in the Goulburn we dumped water into the river. Or recent cloud seeding in Tasmania to make the coming rains worse and create a lethal flood. There is no end to public cleverness and carelessness in wasting billions. Always for your good. The idea that it is to improve work safety or save the planet is the standard excuse. No one believes it. It is nonsensical.

      You would wonder though that Labor/Green governments now dominate Australia and one seat away from control of the country. As communist Adam Bandt said to me, you tell people what they want to hear and when we get power, we do what we want.

      121

  • #
    Robber

    We are all already paying for this insanity. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics consumer price index, the index for electricity in June 2006 was 57 and in June 2016 it is 131, an increase of 130%, while the overall consumer price index index rose by only 27% over the same 10 year period. That’s the RET at work, subsidizing wind and solar and more poles and wires to manage an increasingly complex network.

    121

  • #
    Bob Peel

    Here’s a cool $500m to despoil the panoramic views west from the Bunya Mountains, elevation 1000m in Qld; literally at the foot of this significant Qld site.

    http://www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/coopers-gap-wind-farm.html

    61

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Dennis , our mainstream political parties are all for zero tariffs and zip subsidies .
    If power generation in oz were afforded the same rules renewables would be nothing more than a hobby .
    Some of one nation policy’s are a bit OT I will admit but we can’t whinge unless we are prepared to do something about it , and the only way out is to vote the problem away or move .
    The Labs and greens are determined to ruin the country with debt and failed energy policies and now the Libs seem to have lost their way and have turned a shade of green .
    So how do we fix stupid Dennis ?

    91

  • #
    toorightmate

    There is also that little matter of when the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine, the pixies at the bottom of the garden provide the power.
    Which is a good thing. Otherwise it would take more capital to provide that power with it’s wiz bang Lithium ion batteries (which don’t yet exist) or some other hair-brain idea.

    41

    • #
      bobl

      Otherwise it would take more capital to provide that power with it’s wiz bang Lithium ion batteries firelighters,

      there – fixed.

      Only place I would put that much lithium is in a concrete lined room underground.

      71

  • #
    Another Ian

    “That’s $2300 per man woman and child in Victoria and $5600 per Queenslander.”

    And then how much extra a year if it all happens?

    51

  • #
  • #

    The cost of dismantling and carting the renewable junk away has to be considered. It has been estimated at 15% if you leave all that concrete and wiring in place. In places like South Australia where it’s hard for a shipyard to build a canoe on time and on budget, you’d have to put the cost of total removal way higher. Sky-high, actually.

    Funders won’t be as enthusiastic or subsidy-happy when it comes to removal. Chances are we will be living with the very concrete memory of green stupidity and sanctimony long after our “public intellectuals” and “living national treasures” and “Australians of the Year” have found something else to be sanctimonious and stupid about.

    151

    • #
      el gordo

      There has been no due diligence on renewable energy, everyone is standing behind the precautionary principle and feel they are safe.

      The Nuremberg Defence won’t save politicians, ignorance is no excuse and should lose their seats. Scientists and journalists have a lot to answer for, but no prosecutions are expected.

      81

    • #
      David Maddison

      I heard a figure of $250,000 to dismantle a windmill but I don’t know what the inclusions or exclusions are.

      Maybe they should just be left in place, their overspeed controls deactivated and they be allowed to destroy themselves.

      The forests of destroyed turbines could be left as a monument to man’s folly.

      https://youtu.be/zr3z_7iQ35s

      10

    • #
      Angry

      A stick of dynamite at a wind tower base would do the trick!

      00

  • #
    Mark M

    NO Carbon Tax rally, Sydney, 2012:
    “As for any politicians who have ever believed in global warming, or supported the carbon tax, or a carbon-constrained economy, there is no hope for them.

    They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously.

    Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough.

    Make their lives hell too, just as they wished a diminished life on you.”
    ~ ~ ~
    Example No. 1, 2010; Turnbull: Australians want 100% renewables. Let’s get on with it.
    . . .
    Make their lives hell too, just as they wished a diminished life on you.

    101

  • #
    ROM

    Jo’s headline post;

    Victorians to pay $2300 each, Queenslanders $5600 to make “renewables” target

    The Chinese Communist Party can match that!

    And be assured.
    Anything the Chinese Communist Party can do, our current crop of State Premiers can easily match

    The Chinese Communists send the bill for the 20c cost of the executioner’s bullet to the executed prisoner’s family.

    51

  • #
    Mark M

    “They should do something radical like a cost-benefit analysis on using solar panels to stop the sea rising.”
    . . .
    With Green Politician Adam Bandt claiming more renewable energy will stop once-in-a-lifetime storm like the SA one, a cost-benefit analysis
    is a reasonable request:

    “The storms in South Australia show we need more renewable energy to tackle climate change, not less,” said Mr Bandt.”
    [http://www.adambandt.com/160929]
    ~ ~ ~
    This morning on ABC breakfast, Frydenburg repeats claims the storm was a once-in-a-50-year-event containing 80,000 lightning strikes!

    On ABC, Jay Weatherdill claims the storm is a once-in-a-lifetime-event!

    The pathetic 97% ‘science’ stupidity continues.

    In their hurry to tell lies, they can’t even co-ordinate the history of the last extreme storm, when carbon (sic) was at “safe levels’.

    121

  • #

    Here in Queensland, the Palasczuk Government has this all singing all dancing plan to have Queensland go renewable, and they implemented a QREEP to, umm, bring the people along with them.

    One of their recent releases was the bold new plan for six new large scale (their words) Solar plants, with a total Nameplate (all six of them in total) of 300MW.

    I want you to read the press release (shown at this link) from the Minister (for everything) and note the cost mentioned here, an investment in Queensland of $600 Million. SIX HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.

    So then, in the earlier Thread on Germany and its renewables, I explained how much power these six humugous plants will actually deliver to the Queensland grid. (Comment shown at this link)

    So then, only $600 Million and we can close down ONE relatively small unit (365MW) at ONE power plant ….. for 65 DAYS.

    Oh yeah, trust the Queensland Government to give value for money, and they even use that bogus homes supplied false meme.

    The money thing is bizarre, but the power delivery is just as bizarre.

    Tony.

    201

    • #
      Gordon

      I don’t think the money thing is bizarre.
      First here in Canada, Ontario in particular and soon Alberta, contracts have been signed or will be signed soon. When these windmills fail to produce what they are supposed to the government could terminate the contract. There are penalties for doing that. Quick easy money for the investors. It is all subsidized anyway. These politicians act dumb, but they know where the money is!!!

      71

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        You do get the sense govts are using renewables as a mechanism to deliberately crash the state economies and destroy jobs…. Communists at work….taking down the middle class…

        Sack them all now!

        91

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Tony just thought you might find this amusing, the real kicker is the Mt Mercer wind farm is only a few hundred meters from the battery! :)

      10

  • #
    Olaf Koenders

    Many Moons ago, when I was switching to another electrickery company, the operator asked if i wanted to pay a “small” percentage more for “green” energy coming from wind power.

    I asked how it could be guaranteed that I would only be receiving green wind power. She couldn’t. All she could explain was that it would help pay for the more expensive electrickery.

    She wasn’t even aware of the subsidies paid to these wind farms to make them viable, on top of a “small” percentage on my bill.

    “That would be a no then?” she asked.

    “That would be a no, thanks.” I replied.

    81

  • #
    PeterS

    This is just like the boiling frog syndrome. They should pay ten times more. Then perhaps they will wake up and fight back.

    51

  • #
    pat

    el gordo excerpted some of the Guardian piece re ABC’s Uhlmann.

    Bolt has a thread:

    7 Oct: Bolt Blog: Left declares war on ABC’s Chris Uhlmann
    So when the ABC’s Chris Uhlmann points out the fact that wind power is intermittent, and that a power supply heavily reliant upon it is inherently unreliable, the Left responds not by disproving him but bombarding the ABC with 180 complaints (GUARDIAN LINK)…
    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/left-declares-war-on-abcs-chris-uhlmann/news-story/47886032be7b6f558608a07cb705cf79

    following – Issue of the Day begins at 3hrs30secs – What should the role of renewables be? Targets – should we go full steam ahead or should we be cautious? first few callers will tell u all u need to know about how ill-informed the ABC audience & staff is when it comes to anything CAGW. interim host of the program is Chaser guy, Dominic Knight.

    AUDIO: 5 Oct: Nightlife: the United Nations
    http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/nightlife/nightlife/7886862

    41

  • #
    Hivemind

    I have said it before. You can easily power a state using entirely unreliables. Yes, there are times when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine. But there is no need for coal or gas-powered generators to act as backups.

    You just need to prioritize your power users:
    — green politicians
    — other politicians
    — machinery of government
    — hospitals
    — manufacturing
    — household users

    See how easy it is? Just don’t mention to the voters that they won’t be able to read in the dark. On the plus side, without power, nobody can read anti-green anti-gaia stuff on the Internet either.

    41

  • #
    Peter C

    Message Not Getting Through!

    Email sent to Lily D’Ambrosia (Victorian State Minister for Energy), Josh Frydenberg (Federal Minster for Energy) and Jenny Macklin (local member). No response so far. Comments by D’Ambrosia published in The Age today suggest that she is not receptive.

    Dear Minister,

    I have read that the Hazlewood Power station might close next April. That might be a response to Victorian Government announcements about moving to renewable energy.

    That would be disastrous for our state! It is not just the workers in the Latrobe valley that are at risk. We have already lost a lot of manufacturing industries including cars and aluminium. All our industries rely on stable and cheap electric power.

    Some how you have to keep that power station functioning! Victoria depends on it and so does South Australia and Tasmania. The recent power problems in both Tasmania and now South Australia demonstrate the problems of reliance on renewable energy sources. Both of these states have squandered their citizens money and their future prosperity on renewable energy investment.

    The Labour party is supposed to champion the interests of working people. I want to have useful work in our state so we have to have a strong economy. We have to use every advantage we have. One of those advantages is electricity.

    We need reliable electricity but also the best electricity and the cheapest electricity. That means COAL fired electricity for the time being. We have the resource and we should use it.

    The Greens have confused themselves. Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant. It is an essential constituent of our atmosphere, the gas of life! We could not survive without it. Labour should distance themselves from the Greens, otherwise they will abandon their own voters.

    I am not sure how you will explain that to the Premier and the Federal Labour party. Taking good advice from experts in the electricity industry is a good start, instead of activist (so called) climate scientists

    261

  • #
    pat

    followup to Mark M’s ABC comment:

    SA has a total blackout, but this is the full coverage to date from RN’s Breakfast program:

    29 Sept: Weatherill spin
    30 Sept: “Victoria ‘innovative and nimble’ on renewable energy: Andrews” with Daniel Andrews as the only guest, plus “Risk of private investment in renewables going elsewhere if ‘blame game’ ensues”, featuring Climate Council’s Andrew Stock.
    3 & 4 Oct – nothing.
    5 Oct: ANU guest for “‘We need to be a lot smarter’ about how Australia manages floods: expert” with the summary quoting Bill Shorten renewing calls for more money to be invested in flood mitigation.

    then on ABC’s Breakast program today:

    7 Oct: ABC Breakfast: No new commitment on renewable energy target till 2017 review: Frydenberg
    There will be no federal commitment to a post-2020 renewable energy target or an energy intensity scheme to close coal fired power stations until a ‘critical’ review in 2017, Josh Frydenberg says

    7 Oct: ABC Breakfast: Australia needs national energy plan for ‘no more coal and more gas’: Koutsantonis
    Renewable energy is cheap and good for consumers, but Australia needs to ‘incentivise’ gas and develop a plan for an ‘orderly exit from coal’, says SA Treasurer.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/

    A BILLION-PLUS PER YEAR OF TAXPAYER MONEY, STAFF AROUND THE COUNTRY, YET NOT A SINGLE SEGMENT FEATURING THE PUBLIC IN SA, EXPRESSING OUTRAGE OVER THE BLACKOUT, LOSS OF FOOD STOCKS, BUSINESS LOSSES, ETC.

    101

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Exactly what does little Bill mean by “flood mitagation” surely he is not suggesting building more dams !
      There is bugger all difference between green and labor so it won’t be something useful like more dams , more like a carbon tax to mitigate floods – less Co2 less floods it’s all they know .

      41

    • #
      Bulldust

      Somewhat related – Mr Koutantonis (SA Energy Minister) says keeping the lights on is not his job:

      But Mr Koutsantonis said Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull should also look at his Government’s own regulators to ensure they were doing enough on energy security.

      “They’re barking at us to keep the lights on, well, if you read his own legislation, he’d know that actually it’s the Commonwealth Government that’s responsible for the Australian Energy Market Operation and the Australian Energy Market Commission and the National Electricity Market,” he said.

      “So, if he’s saying keep the lights on and the lights aren’t on, it’s his fault.”

      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-07/energy-ministers-to-meet-over-national-electricity-market/7911456

      Why does SA have an Energy Minister? They cripple their system to the point where it has to suck massive amounts of electricity from the national grid, and they blame the rest of the country for the failure? This man should resign immediately, because in his own words, he is of no use to the state in his current position.

      40

  • #
    pat

    meanwhile, as expected:

    6 Oct: HuffPo: Lydia O’Connor: Hurricane Matthew’s Strength Is Yet Another Climate Change Indicator
    It’s unusual for a storm like this to hit in October
    Hurricane Matthew, a record-shattering storm that is unusual for October, is a reminder of climate change’s potential to turn seasonal weather events into extreme, year-round threats…
    Matthew is the only hurricane of this strength to persist this many October days since 1963, noted Colorado State University meteorologist Philip Klotzbach, an expert in Atlantic hurricane forecasts…
    Matthew also remained a Category 4-5 hurricane for 102 hours, The Washington Post noted, which is the longest amount of time on record that a hurricane of that strength has persisted in the Atlantic basin during the month of October…
    “The nearly unprecedented rapid intensification we saw with this storm is favored by warmer oceans and greater ocean heat content,” Michael E. Mann, a leading climate scientist and professor of meteorology at Penn State University, told The Huffington Post. As the “seasonal window during which sea surface temperatures are warm enough” to support storms increases, he said, “we can expect to see the season broaden.”
    It’s important to note, Mann added, that scientists are still figuring out how wind shear factors into this…

    FOLLOWING LINKS TO THE ABOVE, PLUS INCLUDES A NUMBER OF HUFFPO COMMENTS, WHICH I CANNOT FIND AT THE HUFFO PAGE – DID THEY REMOVE THEM?

    6 Oct: Newsbusters: P.J. Gladnick: HuffPo Readers Skeptical of Hurricane Matthew Global Warming Claim
    Unfortunately for the Huffington Post and the author of the piece, Lydia O’Connor, alert readers pointed out the silliness of laying the blame for Matthew upon the favorite climate culprit of the Left…READ FOR SOME OF THE HUFFPO COMMENTS
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/pj-gladnick/2016/10/06/huffpo-readers-skeptical-hurricane-matthew-global-warming-claim

    5 Oct: Newsbusters: Curtis Houck: What?? NBC’s Ron Allen Thinks Climate Deal Is ‘Designed to Stop’ Storms Like Hurricane Matthew
    http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2016/10/05/what-nbcs-ron-allen-thinks-climate-deal-designed-stop-storms

    10

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    The WeatherDill SA and hunchback marxist Andrews VIC misgovernments need to be ousted along with their delusional renewable rackets.

    The federal coalition is both weak and complicit in this global CAGW scam especially under the misguidance of theft of PMship TurdFull.

    UN appeaser Bishop and True B’lver hunt need to go also,and even Frydenburg has jumped ship for promotion in the Turdfull’s global warming crusade… another of many big disappointments.

    The coalition is finished. They have proved to be no more than Big bank sellouts and conservative traitors.

    The few there that are not need to break away and form there own conservative party in coalition with One nation and the like!

    The ALP should all be in leg irons for how they left this country’s finances and the co-creators with the loony Greens of this CAGW/dud renewables monstrosity.

    Big union lackey Carbon Bill is not fit to lead anybody especially with comments calling carbon pollution (his idea of co2).

    This CAGW clown calls one third of his own body makeup ‘carbon pollution’.

    With such an ignorant and arrogant comment (amongst countless others), how can this imbecile be trusted to run anything, also especially being involved in the demise of 2 of his own side’s sitting PMs.

    Locally, One Nation, Cory Bernardi’s new and real Conservative party and ‘the Donald’ in the USA, are the only alternatives left for sanity and an end, or a beginning of the end to this CAGW medieval ratbagism.

    52

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Interesting idea Igor , merge the decent thinking Libs and one nation it might catch on if we’re lucky but I doubt it .
      I will vote only one nation from here on .

      51

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Well now you can understand why Trump may win the election – the mood in the USA is pretty ugly. The current incumbent seems to have allowed significant class war to develop to create internal instability which is a hallmark of Communism agitprop.

        The yanks at least are armed – the powers that be are trying to turn people against each other to divide and conquer.

        The americans need to stand firm and throw out any orm of Socialism if they want their country back.

        61

    • #
      John Michelmore

      Unless Corey Bernardi forms a new party outside of the current Libs, nothing will change. Are you sure he is not just gathering the dissidents with the aim of controlling them and doing absolutely nothing!!

      00

    • #
      John Michelmore

      Unless Corey Bernardi forms a new party outside of the current Libs, nothing will change. Are you sure he is not just gathering the dissidents with the aim of controlling them and doing absolutely nothing!!

      00

  • #
    David Maddison

    I’ll stick to coal and hydro (and nuclear if we ever get it) thanks. Can I have my $2300 back?

    72

  • #
    pat

    7 Oct: Canberra Times: Christopher Knaus: ACT’s renewable energy target broke investment drought, report finds
    The ACT’s leading renewable energy target helped break a 16-month investment drought caused by federal uncertainty, a new Australia Institute report has found.
    The think tank’s Carbon Emissions Index report was released on Friday morning, timed to coincide with an urgent meeting of state, territory, and federal energy ministers in Victoria.
    The Australia Institute and consultancy Pitt & Sherry found the ACT’s 100 per cent renewable energy target helped drive investment in two wind farms, one in Ararat in Victoria, and another in Hornsdale, South Australia.
    The Ararat farm will provide enough power for 37,200 Canberra homes, while Hornsdale would generate enough for 168,500…
    Energy consultant Hugh Saddler, who authored the report, said the ACT helped drive investment during a time of uncertainty for clean energy, caused by concerns about the status of the energy target under then Prime Minister Tony Abbott…
    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/acts-renewable-energy-target-broke-investment-drought-report-finds-20161007-grx46r.html

    Knaus provides no link to the report, but here it is.
    it includes the Canberra Times wind stuff & Abbott Govt reference, but it’s the SA Blackout section that will be of interest to those who have been analysing the matter:

    PDF: 8 pages: Australia Institute: CEDEX plus Carbon Emissions Index
    National Electricity Market update, data to September 2016
    Total coal generation also rose slightly to 75.9%, compared with a minimum of 72.3% in the year to July 2014…
    PAGE 5: The South Australian blackout
    The August 2016 South Australian Electricity Report contains an extensive discussion of the reliability of supply under circumstances where supply through the Heywood interconnector is lost, including, in the Executive
    Summary, the following statement:
    “In the rare event of the unexpected concurrent loss of both Heywood Interconnector lines, there is a high
    risk of a region-wide blackout in South Australia. South Australia has separated from the rest of the NEM
    due to such non-credible contingency events four times since 1999. The likelihood that a region-wide blackout would follow a non-credible islanding event has increased as the region has become more reliant on energy imports, and wind and rooftop photovoltaic (PV) generation, to meet demand.”
    It is possible that this, or another statement like it, may have provided a pretext for commentators, unaware of AEMO’s work on system security, to voice doubt and speculation on renewable generation.
    Loss of the two Heywood Interconnector lines was not what occurred on 28 September. What did occur, as clearly
    set out in the preliminary report by AEMO, released on the morning of 5 October, was loss, over a period of 40
    seconds, of sections of three of the four major transmission lines running between Adelaide and Port Augusta…READ ALL
    http://www.tai.org.au/sites/defualt/files/CEDEX%20Electricity%20update%20October%202016%20final.pdf

    20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    another one-sided, pro-renewables ABC piece…

    7 Oct: ABC: SA blackout: Energy ministers to hold snap meeting over possible national electricity market review
    By political reporters Francis Keany and Tom Iggulden
    ACT Environment Minister Simon Corbell said the target enjoyed bipartisan support from the Canberra Liberals.
    “So there’s not even agreement on Malcolm Turnbull’s own side when you look at state and territory parties when it comes to an ambitious and realistic and achievable renewable energy target,” he said…
    Report finds blackout a ‘non-credible contingency’
    A study released by think-tank The Australia Institute, in conjunction with engineering consultants Pitt & Sherry, described last week’s blackout as “the most severe possible” and rare event that authorities had not planned for.
    CEDEX report author Hugh Saddler, who works as an energy consultant, said there was a loss of power in sections of three out of the four main transmission lines running between Port Augusta and Adelaide.
    “The National Electricity Rules (Rule 4.2.3) describe an event such as occurred as a ‘non-credible contingency’,” Mr Saddler said in a statement.
    “That means the damage was so extreme, that well-planned for but seldom used protocols stopped any power producer delivering electricity to households.”
    He said the resulting loss of electricity supply and the automatic protection systems that kicked in still would have happened, even if the closed coal-fired Northern Power Station in Port Augusta was operating.
    “It is highly likely that it would have been affected by, and responded to, a sudden large loss of load in exactly the same way as the windfarms, with the same ultimate consequence,” Mr Saddler said…
    Power company defends wind generation
    AGL, which operates both wind farms and traditional generators in SA, issued a press release late yesterday follow preliminary investigations into last week’s blackout.
    It said the energy company’s current view was that “the reduction in wind generation ***ALONE was not sufficient in scale to cause the system to blackout”…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-07/energy-ministers-to-meet-over-national-electricity-market/7911456

    20

  • #
    pat

    6 Oct: Adelaide Advertiser Editorial: Power supply faces lashing in new storm
    But the Australian Energy Market Operator’s ­preliminary findings fail to shed much light on the deep-seated causes of the unprecedented outage, which cut power for hours and, to some regions, days.
    This leaves open the questions of the stability and security of the South Australian power grid and, more controversially, the role played by wind generators in contributing to the cascading statewide power cut.
    SA has suffered enormous damage, both to its reputation and economy. Key industries, including BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam, Whyalla’s Arrium steelworks and Port Pirie’s Nyrstar smelter, have lost hundreds of millions of ­dollars.
    Affordable and reliable electricity supply is vital to industry. Last Wednesday’s blackout damages the state’s reputation as an investment destination, compounding efforts to lower one of the nation’s highest unemployment rates.
    Premier Jay Weatherill, who yesterday looked unusually harried and pressured, has pinned his political future to renewable energy and heaped blame for the devastating blackout on the extreme weather.
    In doing so, he has left little wriggle room should the unexplained sudden loss of 315MW of wind-farm generation be found to have been a critical contributor to the statewide blackout.
    What does seem obvious is that the state’s power network was designed and built years ago, when coal and gas generators reigned and wind power was used to pump water. It remains to be seen if it is adequate for today’s requirements.
    SA is not alone in facing the challenge of integrating renewable energy into the power grid. This will be a major topic at a meeting tomorrow of state and federal energy ministers. Their key task, however, is to ensure stable, secure and affordable power supply – something our state should take for granted.
    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/editorial-power-supply-faces-lashing-in-new-storm/news-story/3bcf276130e33b596f10c7d581c33fad

    tellingly, my general Google news page and the Google Australia news page DO NOT have a single link to the meeting of energy ministers.

    50

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    “higher prices to fund ill-­considered renewable energy targets”…..extract from Frydenberg comment.

    I consider any renewable energy target above absolute zero in the pursuit of planetary salvation as a reduction of CAGW …..ill-considered, delusional and of racketeering and scam infested in nature!

    42

    • #
      TdeF

      The only renewable part of windmills is the windmill itself. This is not a medium or long term solution to the energy needs of Australia. Worse, we have adequate power today which is being shut down for reasons which make no sense, commercially or environmentally. A crazy idea that carbon dioxide is pollution, that all plants and animals on the planet are polluters.

      In which case the real problem for Australia are the 74million methane producing sheep, the 29 million cattle and the 60 million kangaroos plus the trillions of termites. Humans are almost irrelevant. Nature is the real polluter and methane has 30x as much green house effect as CO2. So roughly 160million animals who produce 30 as much warming, 5000x as much warming as humans. We need to get rid of the kangaroos, sheep, cattle and termites. They are the polluters.

      81

      • #
        Dennis

        Get it right T de F: Carbon pollution … lol

        20

      • #
        TdeF

        Or to put some numbers to this. We Australians apparently output 600 million tons of CO2 a year. Each person in fact outputs 3 tons per year by just breathing, so add another 3×24 or 72million tons. Now the sheep, cattle and kangaroos, some much bigger than humans and some smaller, output 7x as much methane on population which means 200x as much impact on Greenhouse gases. As sheep and cattle are not native to Australia, it is obvious they are the problem, careless CH3 emitters. So why are we closing power stations when the sheep are the problem?

        20

        • #
          Annie

          You’ll have to go veggo TdeF! I think their output is overated compared with what ‘Mother’ Nature puts out via goelogical means!

          10

  • #
    Mark M

    Frydenburg doing press conference as I type.

    There will be a report, council of australian government (coag) based.

    Aust Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel to chair it. Some links:

    Alan Finkel, Cosmos (August 2016)
    Imagine if you took all the lithium-ion batteries produced in 2014 for phones, laptops and cars and instead used them to provide backup for the global electricity supply.
    They’d keep the world running for just nine seconds!

    https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/scale-and-a-new-favourite-number

    Alan Finkel to the IAEA (sept 2016)
    For example, if we took all the lithium ion batteries we produced right across the world in 2014, how long do you think we could rely on them to satisfy global electricity demand?
    Forty-six seconds, ladies and gentlemen…

    http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/28-Sept-IAEA-FOR-DISTRIBUTION.pdf

    (h/t catallaxy comments)

    40

  • #
    el gordo

    American opinion on climate change is pretty clear cut, a decadal trend has revealed itself

    ‘Americans’ beliefs about climate change were recently surveyed by the Pew Research Center, and the results were made public a few days ago. Pew pollsters found that a combined 51% of Americans agree that (a) there is no clear evidence the Earth is warming, or (b) natural factors are the main cause of climate changes. Therefore, just 48% of Americans believe the Earth is getting warmer, and this warming is mostly caused by humans. This belief percentage has essentially remained unchanged for the last 10 years, or since the survey was first conducted in 2006.’

    No Tricks Zone

    30

    • #
      David Maddison

      It’s disturbing that around half still believe in AGW despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary.

      51

      • #
        TdeF

        First you have to care.
        Second, it has to cost you some of your own money.

        What will be rocking Labor/Green voters in South Australia is that both are now true.

        Now Labor and the Greens have some explaining to do to the people who lost all their freezer contents, had no power for days, were stuck somewhere, could not watch television or use their computers and understand why perfectly good power stations had been shut down because of Global Warming drought in the middle of a flood, not sea level rise. Nothing they were told was true.

        You can fool some of the people some of the time.

        50

        • #
          TdeF

          What of the people in Whyalla, desperate to keep their jobs and the State of South Australia turns off the Port Augusta power supply, leaving them without jobs?
          There will be a great deal of anger in South Australia. It is not the job of Weatherill and his friends to cripple the state. Act of God? No one believes that.
          Queensland does not shut down power in a storm, so why should South Australia? You would think the opposition in South Australia would have something to say, but not a peep.
          Just sniping from Malcolm Turnbull. He is a windmill type. Runs on wind.

          60

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘It’s disturbing that around half still believe …’

        Historians will later marvel at the power of propaganda, saving the planet for our grandchildren is science fiction, but the blob effectively and indiscriminately influenced half the western world.

        It won’t be an easy job turning their world upside down.

        40

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          Future historians will have their own problems to deal with in their own time. And they’ll have exactly the same delimma, half the people believe in “vodoo cult”.

          History repeats. I’m reading books from the 1300′s, and I read the same words then as I do today; “Our politicians can’t be trusted”, “They are making themselves rich at our expense”.

          PS: They also used a lot more punctuation back then too;:-.

          00

      • #
        Geoffrey Williams

        David,there are a lot of people blogging on this site who are saying much the same as yourself ie if the people/voters out there are silly enough to believe in the green myth of man made climate change and the end of civilisation as we know it,then truly that is what we will get!
        We will become a bankrupt, 2nd rate country with no control over our future. It is happening already. As a nation and society we have allowed ourselves to be hoodwinked.
        The average Joe out there on the street does not really undestand climate change/global warming at all, but will readilly argue with you on the subject, usually spouting something to the effect ‘but we have to do something don’t we for our childrens future!?’ What can one expect-there’s at least a whole generation who have had this CO2 rubbish drilled into their heads. Brainwashed by media, school and college!
        And what they vote doesn’t matter so long as enough of them vote green and they will.
        It could take another 20 years to reverse the politics, by then it will be too late and we will just be history.
        GeoffW

        30

    • #
      TdeF

      It means they believe what they have been told by their government for thirty years. Global Warming started when the IPCC was formed in 1988. Prior to that the big scare was Global Cooling. So anyone under 40 does not remember a time when man made Global Warming was not true and it is a platform of the left and the Democrats. There is your 50%. What do the people who don’t pay taxes care anyway. It’s not their problem. As Mitt Romney said, how can you win an election when over 50% of Americans live on government handouts? Is it any different in Australia?

      61

  • #
    pat

    ***it costs nothing!!!

    6 Oct: Bloomberg: Anna Hirtenstein: Arresting Global Warming ***Doesn’t Mean More Money, Top Panel Says
    Global infrastructure spending seen at $90 trillion by 2031
    The world is expected to invest $90 trillion on all infrastructure in the next 15 years which is more than the present value of all existing infrastructure combined, according to a report released Thursday by the former president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, who’s the chairman of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate (LINK). The money will be spent on projects like road, grid and bridge replacements in advanced economies along with new infrastructure in developing regions.
    “We can invest the $90 trillion in the dirty unsustainable infrastructure of the past or leap forward into the clean and efficient infrastructure of the future,” Calderon said in a conference call. “It basically has the same costs and net present value.”…
    Clean infrastructure typically has a higher up-front cost but the difference is leveled out over time because of efficiency gains, according to the report.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-06/arresting-global-warming-doesn-t-mean-more-money-top-panel-says

    ***or does it cost double???

    6 Oct: Reuters: Alister Doyle: Greener infrastructure said key to Paris climate deal: study
    Overall, it projected infrastructure investments from now until 2030 of around $90 trillion, roughly ***double recent levels and mostly in developing nations and cities…
    Nicholas Stern, of the London School of Economics and a co-chair of the commission, said governments and investors needed to adopt new policies for investments in the next two or three years, given long lead times…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-summit-infrastructure-idUSKCN1260NE

    6 Oct: UK Independent: Ian Johnston: Global economy could ‘self-destruct’ if world carries on burning fossil fuels, leading economist warns
    “The challenge is urgent: the investment choices we make even over the next two to three years will start to lock in for decades to come either a climate-smart, inclusive growth pathway, or a high-carbon, inefficient and unsustainable pathway,” said the report by The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate…
    The report said a total of $90 trillion (£70 trillion) – about five times the US’s annual GDP – would have to be spent on infrastructure over the next 15 years, more than value of the entire amount that exists today…
    However, Caio Koch-Weser, a former vice-chairman of Deutsche Bank and a member of the commission, said private investors could become an increasing factor – because those putting money into fossil fuels might one day find their investment is worthless…
    Mr Trump has been described as a “threat to the planet” (LINK) by world-leading climate scientist Professor Michael Mann…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-economy-self-destruct-nicholas-stern-fossil-fuels-sustainable-infrastructure-report-a7347211.html

    20

  • #
    robdel

    We should go all out for 100% renewables as fast as possible. The public need a truly terrible shock to knock them out of their torpor and finally destroy the Lab/Lib/Green representatives and CAGW predelictions. At present the public is giving the benefit of the doubt to these ecoloons because the changes are happening gradually. 100% renewables and astronomic energy bills plus awful power outages should bury these scoundrels in government once and for all, which is why I am calling for full steam ahead on RE; a sharp, sudden and huge disaster is desperately needed so that the public can see the folly of these RE policies and never vote in these creeps.

    40

    • #
      ROM

      Relax robdel @#44.

      The Germans are close, probably very close if they get a bad winter coming up, to providing the example you want along with California within a decade if the San Andreas Fault doesn’t let go first and as it is, things are beginning to move on its southern regions with some nervousness being seen amongst seismologists, plus a couple of Canadian provinces.
      Although the Germans being somewhat obstinate and take a fair bit to made to shift course, I should know as that is my genetic legacy!!, are now building a couple of dozen big Ultra Supercritical power generators with a reduction in CO2 emmissions of some 40% with the thin walled , fast reacting thin walled bolier technology.

      And don’t forget South Aus.

      News; [ Sept30th ]

      It also experienced a blackout in some parts of Adelaide, Barossa Valley, Port Pirie and west coast region late last year. That was blamed on the failure of the interconnector.
      Electricity supplier ElectraNet said the disruption was caused by an incident at a substation in Mingboll, in the state’s southeast that blocked supply from Victoria. It took about three hours to restore power to about 110,000 customers.
      ElectraNet acknowledged South Australia had relied on Victorian power for a long time.

      Wide spread SA Blackouts;

      –Late in 2015

      –Sept 28, 2016

      And like flat tires, they probably come in threes!
      So still one to go.
      ———–
      When it does, plus another one or two in another state, Vic with Dopey Despot Dan in charge being the most likely then like Spain today, possibly by then like Germany as well, Renewable Energy will be over and done with politically.

      Of course Palace-chick in Brisbane might come to the rescue with her renewable power and black out the tiny bottom SE corner of Queensland where all the greens and etc reside in considerable well powered comfort which would fix the whole Renewable deal real quick.

      Even more so if the USA with its frakking for oil and gas plus the UK with its frakking for gas now finally open for business are seen to be flat strap industrialising again with the UK’s economy now growing faster since Brexit than was envisaged or even hoped for and quite a lot faster than the rest of the EU.

      The truly crazy item with the likes of the stupidity and ignorance personified to the max in the line up of renewable energy believing state premiers is that they could have their cake and eat it too.

      Any in depth study of renewable energy, ie; wind and solar in this case, will reveal that the so called CO2 savings in emissions after the emissions from making steel and concrete and mining the ores and transportation and copper refining and erection and then adding the emission costs of low efficiency standby generators when the wind don’t blow or blows to much [ sic ] or the sun don’t shine even from the politician’s nether regions, any in depth study and there are a lot around, would point to the fact that replacing the current coal fired generators with the latest Ultra Supercritical coal fired steam generators would give up to a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions, increase fuel consumption efficiencies from 33% to over 40% and thereby reduce coal consumption and therefore fuel costs and emissions of every type and still have a half century life generator that will provide power for at least 90% of the time over the entire period of its power generation without blackouts or any serious generation problems.

      Supercritical mass: inside the new generation of coal-fired power plants

      Sadly through a combination of plain arrogance, hubris, all round abject ignorance on a grand scale, ineptness, inflexibility and plain straight bigotry and a rigid, extraordinarily narrow intellectual mentality meshing with rigid ideologically based obstinacy, the State Premiers, their so called advisers who are even worse than the Premiers and the Federal ministers will simply ignore even looking at the potential of taking Australia’s energy generation systems down this now next and already very well proven path to the Ultra Supercritical steam power generation technology.

      No!

      Instead if the premiers have their ignorant way, we will have wall to wall wind turbines, no industry of any note, little employment, vast economic differences between the rich who made their money out of renewables and the legions of the poor who had to pay for it until the Black outs and unaffordable costs completely destroy the entire vaporous clouds of total myth surround the ability of wind turbines and solar cells on their own to ever power an energy dependent civilisation.
      And for the politicians, a non stop political nightmare every time prices go up, health problems emerge on a large scale amongst those exposed to turbine infra sound [ over 120 papers were published in 2015 on the emerging turbine infrasound very serious mental and physical health created problems with one senior engineer being quoted as a former believer in wind power but would now aftr studying turbine infrasound in Germany want to be a least five kilometres away from any wind turbines with his living quarters ] Blackouts occurring, thuggish and thieving wind operators being exposed and many other etc’s.

      Coal fired stations of an ultra modern Ultra Supercritical type would just chug along very quietly politically and physically in the background providing endless power in an almost limitless manner with only a couple of percent of those of a green activist dictatorial disposition creating any background political noise about them.

      But then just maybe by then, the Lockheed Skunk Works or one of the half dozen other corporations working furiously on harnessing Fusion power might just crack the technology to operate a Fusion powered generating system.

      Wind turbines and solar systems would most likely by then along with their owners and landlords and political and media running dogs become the most unloved items in the local universe.
      Retribution would in that case, be very sweet indeed for those who had been forced to go to the bottom of the pile economically due to the unaffordable cost and industry and business destroying intermittency of the so called and badly misnamed Renewable Energy.

      40

  • #
    David Maddison

    This is a must see. Watch Australia’s debt go up in real time.

    http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

    30

  • #
    pat

    7 Oct: HuffPo: Paul Polman (Unilever): Sustainable infrastructure: Looking beyond man-made value
    Every few decades, we have an opportunity to make a drastic change to the way we live our lives. We get a chance to design the building blocks of our daily routines, the infrastructure that will support and accompany us for the years to come – from the trains and trams we ride, the offices we work in, to the energy that powers our homes…
    Only sustainable infrastructure – one that refuses to trade long-term sustainability for short-term gains – will bring about the transformative change we need…
    Making explicit this link between sustainable infrastructure, development and climate change is a new report from the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate…
    The report estimates that, across man-made and natural infrastructure, the need for investment stands at US$90 trillion over the next 15 years. Two-thirds of that will go to emerging markets…
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/sustainable-infrastructur_b_12376024

    so developed countries will provide the $90 trillion presumably and $60 trillion of that – $4 trillion per year over 15 years – will go to “emerging markets”! good luck with that, Polman.

    8 Oct: Economist: The Green Climate Fund: The green light
    A UN climate fund seeks a role
    WHEN Vestine Mukeshimana bought electric lights last month from BBOXX, an off-grid solar company, it helped her spot snakes in her garden and stopped thieves making off with her cow. In her Rwandan village she and her neighbours now cook after dark and their children study in the evenings. They have never heard of the Green Climate Fund (GCF)… But last month such household solar schemes became its first disbursed investment.
    Understaffed and buffeted by politics, the GCF is struggling to define itself. It started operations last year after coaxing $10.3 billion from governments. Raising money was hard; spending it is proving even harder. Its board meets on October 12th in Songdo, South Korea, to weigh up proposals. It will also have to mull appointing a new boss. Hela Cheikhrouhou, the old one, has left, warning that the wrong projects are being financed…
    The talk is of “paradigm shifts”. But of the 17 projects approved so far, few are transformational. In June, for instance, the board approved $49m to plonk more solar panels in a Chilean desert so baked in solar energy that some suppliers had been giving it away. Over 90% of the money is being funnelled through the usual suspects, such as multilateral development banks and UN agencies. Many of them, says one observer, have been pulling old proposals out of drawers. National authorities are puffing to keep up.
    Part of the problem is politics…
    “The GCF is under pressure to be everything to everyone,” says Niranjali Amerasinghe of the World Resources Institute, a research organisation. Bankers want to lure investment from pension funds; the World Bank is promoting dam projects; civil-society groups demand “locally driven” development. The GCF cannot give them all a green light.
    http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21708267-un-climate-fund-seeks-role-green-light

    20

  • #
    John Watt

    Not confident in Alan Finkel as the presiding expert on this issue. Preference should be given to someone who has participated in the design, construction and operation of an electricity system. Someone who has had to balance an electricity authority budget and front the public when supply fails. Such a person would :
    Focus on reliable, cost-effective generation technologies
    Sponsor a “horses for courses” approach to each load size and type.(eg.for loads remote from grid or on outer edges of grid, suitably backed-up renewables may be cost-effective. )
    Promote tried and tested strategies for achieving first-world supply security. (Outages will occur but the South Oz event indicates extreme interference by politicians ignorant of the reality of effective power supply.)
    Counter ill-informed political interference with relevant facts (eg. present Evans/Nicol/ Svensmark arguments when pollies recite the Flannery/Gore /Obama catechism)
    Be well aware that affordable reliable electricity supply is something we have enjoyed in this country for decades and that creating a system that charges us more for less has to be made a sackable offence for politicians.

    60

    • #
      David Maddison

      See my comment above about Finkel. He believes in “renewables” and battery backup thereof (references provided).

      My prediction is that his report will recommend the solution to the renewables disaster will be compulsory battery backup for all homes and industry.

      20

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    I would not want to pay 10 cents to meet emissions requirements.

    I wonder what would happen if everyone refused to pay this whatever you call it. Well… …it amounts to a tax. A war once started over unjust taxation.

    What in the world is wrong with enjoying low energy costs? Isn’t that the objective in the first place? I guess not.

    30

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      What is the objective? Self promotion.

      Politicians, everyone other than Paulin Hanson; are little rich kids. They wouldn’t know a hard day if they fell over one.

      When a town like Mackay goes from boom to bust within a year, all because of a decision a politician made, Labor in this case, you know they are out of touch with reality. They don’t have a clue.

      Labor spent $900 million dollars on the Traverston dam here on the Sunshine Coast, and not a sod of soil was turned. The project was cancelled because of some “green” harm excuse.
      http://www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/traveston-crossing-dam.html

      00