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

Fifty Shades of Loadshedding — “Welcome darkness my good friend”

Love it!  (Sing ’til you cry).

Welcome darkness my good friend

it’s good to meet you once again

Because the power grids are stressing,

that’s the reason for load shedding…

– Shrish Viyas Hargoon                                      h/t Lance.

….

Why they do it, we all know

cos their resources are low

they are doing it in three stages

Feels like we are living in dark ages

Lights are taken away from us

without a fuss

give a few hours of darkness

And the people are not sure

what to do any more

How do we avoid this pain

Our lives are taking lots of strain

Without power we may never function again,

it’s such a shame…

In just a few hours of darkness…..

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (88 votes cast)
Fifty Shades of Loadshedding -- "Welcome darkness my good friend", 9.2 out of 10 based on 88 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/h75c4t5

140 comments to Fifty Shades of Loadshedding — “Welcome darkness my good friend”

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    An ode to SA , victoriastan, NSW and the stupidity of the green movement .

    322

    • #
      PeterS

      Don’t blame the Greens or the ALP. Blame it all on the stupidity of the typical Australian voter who will continue to vote for either LNP or ALP+Greens and then scratch their heads wondering why we are going over the economic cliff with the lights out.

      410

      • #
        Dennis

        But we (they) want more money for education, health, roads, and a host of other voter demands.

        Unfortunately they do not understand that every dollar governments have to spend is provided by taxpayers including borrowed monies with interest liabilities and repayment.

        30

      • #
        Geoffrey Williams

        Lemmings don’t know what they doing . . . .
        Such a great shame.
        GeoffW

        10

        • #
          Ceetee

          I have this intense love/hate relationship with the self proclaimed lucky country. How can they produce a Bradman, a Fraser (Dawn) a wealth of others worthy of real respect and yet allow such arseholes to pervade their national culture. You fellas should never, NEVER be in a position where load shedding becomes part of your daily lives. Load shedding is the domain of third world countries who don’t have the means to run a truly first world power network. Message to Aussie cousins from us across the ditch. Please PLEASE think about where you put that tick in the ballot box. Any polly who even mentions man made global warming goes in the mental trash bin OK Trev!!!!

          10

  • #
    Popeye26

    “How do we avoid this pain”?

    Here’s one suggestion – GO NUCLEAR!!

    Sunniva Rose – “How Bad is it REALLY?”

    Cheers,

    133

    • #
      AndyG55

      Nah, we have some of the world’s best coal.. That is what we should be using.

      One new large HELE power station in each of Qld, NSW, Vic, and a SOTA gas plant in SA and WA would solve basically every power supply problem in Australia, and the cost would be far less than any “unreliable” solution.

      504

      • #
        Robert Rosicka

        Why Hele ? What’s wrong with the old systems tried and true , fertilising the worlds crops for years

        211

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          The current plants are largely old and need replacement in the near future. Saying it is Low Emissions makes it easier to sell the idea, esp. to those who prefer reliable supply to frequent blackouts. Once Victoria starts having blackouts and these flow onto NSW and Qld. (don’t forget that NSW draws from Vic. and Qld. from NSW so a failure in Vic. will extend to more than SA) there will be a huge public demand for reliable electricity, esp. if it comes cheaper than over-hyped renewables.

          211

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘Why Hele ?’

          Turnbull wants to borrow from the China Infrastructure Bank (a green bank) and is arguing that Hele does reduce emissions, but Beijing has a glut of perfectly good solar panels and windmills which they would prefer exporting down under. They may consider changing the policy later, once they have flogged their renewables.

          I don’t know why Turnbull doesn’t just do a Khemlani and borrow the money off a Beijing family company, they make up over five percent of all companies in China and they don’t have any foibles about a harmless trace gas.

          ‘Chinese banks and companies are currently involved in at least 79 coal fired generation projects, with a total capacity of over 52 GW, more than the 46 GW of planned coal closures in the United States by 2020.’

          The Diplomat

          130

        • #
          AndyG55

          Efficiency is always good. :-)

          30

        • #
          David Maddison

          Robert, a while ago on this blog I also asked about why should we go HELE or supercritical or ultrasupercritical to use the non-PC terms. Even in a free market without climate scares it is worthwhile to do use this technology because it is more efficient and uses less fuel so running costs are lower despite the higher capital costs. Unfortunately the downside is that CO2 production is less than with normal plant which is a disadvantage for the environment.

          110

    • #
      PeterS

      Going nuclear would be the obvious choice if runaway man-made global warming were true. Given it’s not the better move is to stick to coal since it’s cheaper and we have enough to last us for centuries. The irony and stupidity of it all is the rest of the world IS building more and more coal fired power stations. Several hundred are being built over the next few years. We are not building even just one. We are the stupid country. We deserve to have our economy crash and burn in due course, which it will if we continue on the road we are on now.

      381

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      To GO NUCLEAR would require the scientific community to get honest about:

      1. The nuclear force that causes fission, and

      2. Real vs exaggerated dangers of radiation.

      Remember:

      3. Earth formed 4.5 Ga ago as radioactive debris from a SN explosion 5 Ga ago.

      4. Earth’s natural level of radioactivity has since decreased exponentially.

      5. Natural nuclear reactors burned on Earth spontaneously 2 Ga ago.

      6. Life started and evolved while exposed to nuclear radiation.

      81

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      You mean blow the place up?!
      Why not . . .
      GeoffW

      01

  • #
    john karajas

    Like you say, Jo, a perfectly good civilisation is going to waste.

    230

  • #
    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      From the WUWT quoted press release:

      Through its Climate of the Nation series, TCI has also conducted what is now the longest trend survey of the attitudes of Australians to climate change and its solutions.

      So you create a faux problem, create much publicity about said faux problem, start a running trend survey of attitudes about said faux problem, report on the results of the survey of the faux problem (possibly being creative with inflation) in order to maintain the level of publicity churn, and, in the meantime, keep on applying for grants, based on the public awareness of, and apparent concern about, the faux problem created by the publicity.

      Except, at the end of the day, the public were aware, but apparently not concerned. Oh dear! How sad? Never mind.

      Yer average Okker ain’t so dumb, as some folks make out.

      190

      • #
        Yonniestone

        I agree Rereke the whole things fauxed.

        120

      • #
        Ceetee

        Rereke the same recipe is applied the world over. Its just that the ingredients change depending on the location. The great thing about catching these twits out is the very fact that they operate as a collective i.e. you can see the pattern no matter the location or the ingredients.

        00

    • #
    • #
      Hasbeen

      Isn’t it fun, watching the wheels actually fall of a carriage of the gravy train.

      20

  • #
    Aussiebear

    Setting: A dark and calm night.

    Child: Grandpa, what did you use before candles at night when you were younger?

    Grandpa: Electricity, young child, electricity. God Bless it…

    301

  • #
    pat

    having marched us down the “renewables” garden path, ABC makes a confession!

    9 Mar: ABC: Nick Harmsen: South Australia’s power woes expose deeper problems with nation’s energy security
    Australia is rapidly stumbling into a major energy crisis, and there’s little evidence to suggest the federal and state governments can agree on the solutions to fix it.
    This horrifyingly stark picture is painted by the blandly titled ‘Gas Statement of Opportunities’ released by the Australian Energy Market Operator today.
    To understand what’s coming, look no further than my home state of South Australia.
    In short, the sudden and unexpected closure of ageing coal plants at Hazelwood in Victoria this month and Port Augusta in South Australia last year are putting enormous pressure on power supply.

    From next summer, on hot days, there may not be enough electricity in either state to go around. In South Australia, wholesale prices are regularly spiking to the market-allowed maximum of $14,000 per megawatt hour…

    In the absence of a carbon price, the only investment in new large-scale electricity generation is in renewables — primarily wind and solar.
    These projects are primarily funded through subsidies — Renewable Energy Certificates.
    The subsidy is imposed by the Federal Government, but paid for by power retailers. That means it’s really paid for by power users. Some states are also pursuing their own Renewable Energy Targets with inbuilt subsidy mechanisms.
    Because wind farms make money from these subsidies, they can afford to underbid coal and gas into the wholesale electricity market.

    The problem is, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. The high peaks in South Australia’s energy usage don’t always match up with a large chunk of its increasingly intermittent supply.
    Intermittency isn’t the only problem though. Under current market settings, wind farms aren’t required to provide the same stability coal and gas has traditionally provided to the energy grid…

    Without getting too technical, the national electricity market is a machine. It has to stay in sync. It was designed last century to transmit power from huge clunking turbines and spinning wheels, not the nimble inverters connected to wind farms and solar cells…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/political-leadership-needed-to-secure-future-of-energy-supply/8339116

    why, it’s almost as if Nick has been visiting jo’s blog.

    131

    • #
      Dennis

      No need to imagine how shareholders in a public company would react if the board of directors and company executives reporting to the board made decisions that led the company into a crisis situation.

      10

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      The Long March Mk II?

      00

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      Thanks Pat,
      IMHO the words “the sudden and unexpected closure of ageing coal plants at Hazelwood in Victoria this month and Port Augusta in South Australia last year are putting enormous pressure on power supply.” are a pretty good example of the inadequate analysis by MSM journos.
      Sudden? No. Predicted and inevitable? Yes. Forced out by government stupidity.

      Ageing? Only sort of. Rather, still fully functional in spite of their age, and able to last until a suitable replacement could have been built. Now to be destroyed in their prime.
      Cheers,
      Dave B

      60

  • #
    TdeF

    November 2016
    Australia’s dirtiest coal-fired power plant, will officially close by the end of March.

    French energy company ENGIE says station no longer economically viable

    About 250 workers will remain at the power station until 2023 to manage the site’s rehabilitation.
    ENGIE says it will sell off its Loy Yang B power station, which employs about 200 people. Why?
    The plant, in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley, employs about 750 people, with 450 direct employees and 300 contractors.

    The company said about 250 workers would remain at the power station between 2017 and 2023 to manage the site’s rehabilitation.
    (This will cost someone $1.6Bn and Victoria will lose the income from selling the coal too)

    ENGIE chief executive in Australia, Alex Keisser, said the 1,600-megawatt power station was no longer economically viable. Why? Why? Why? We are paying record prices and they cannot break even?

    What will happen when the Hazelwood power plant shuts down?

    South Australia will immediately be in crisis.
    NSW, the major user of power will also be in major trouble.
    Tasmania will be in terrible trouble despite getting its decomissioned gas turbine back
    Manufacturing will die in Victoria as power cost is 10x that of the US. We cannot afford to make Aluminum and 75% of Alcoa is out of action from the last power outage.

    Total National power losses from closed power stations will go from 5GW to 6.4GW, all of it baseload for storms, winter, summer heat and heavy manufacturing.

    However our politicians are not asking why because they know why the cheapest, largest fully used power station in the country is being forced to close because it is losing money!

    Politicians alone have decided coal is the ‘dirtiest power’ because of one thing, invisible and harmless and essential carbon dioxide. This shows why governments should not be in the power business. Governments find it easier to stop anything than to do anything. England would have lost WW2 if not for private enterprise secretly designing and building the Rolls Royce Merlin engine and Hawker aircraft despite the fact that Chamberlain and Malcolm Turnbull’s Great Uncle George Lansbury head of the Labor party wanted peace at any cost and were against rearmament.

    Stopping progress is the function of bed wetting ‘progressives’ like the Greens, Labor and now Malcolm’s limp wristed Liberals. Get the government out of generation with their endless punitive taxes on life and manufacturing and agriculture and mining and gas exploration and fishing but especially on Carbon Dioxide.

    Why is Hazelwood losing cash at record electricity prices? Because they are not being paid and the Victoria government just increased their basic cost of coal 300% without explanation. They are being forced to close by the Unions and politicians who want control of power, telephones, internet and your lives.

    No one else wants Hazelwood to close. It is a crime against Victoria. Of course it is cheered by the mad Greens and all the politicians who care more about money than representing their constituents.

    Get rid of Fake Science. Crap Science. Bring back Tony Abbott. He will drain the swamps of Canberra and Spring Street. Half of the Liberal politicans could go home too and we would be better off. No one would miss the Senate. Give the GST money back to the states who paid it.

    502

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Tdef, the mad monk was a slave to his party and the factions , nothing’s changed and probably never will , look elsewhere for a saviour .

      1112

      • #
        • #
          TdeF

          Bernadi is one of the good people but a Senator and now not even in the Liberal party, despite Abbott’s advice to fight from the inside. Both disqualify him from PM. Only a member of the House of Representatives qualifies. Yes, there are other good people but few have the experience, skills and knowledge.

          Remember Abbott was the blatant victim of an unrelenting campaign of personal vilification over a decade, starting with Gillard and mysogyny. Eating an onion. Winking on radio. Acceding to the direct request of the Palace. Fake news. He was the victim of an admitted plan to be assaulted on Australia day in Canberra by aborigines and one of Gillard’s staff fled the country when it failed. This was in concert with their ABC.

          We all know Abbott won by a landslide and saw off three Labor leaders, despite the strident opposition including the ABC/SBS and Fairfax. He was removed for no good reason and needs to finish what he started. Get rid of the Renewable Energy Tax. No one else can do it. Abbott’s acheivements are admired from Trump to Europe. He spoke sense on immigration, as was ridiculed and now recognized world wide.

          If Abbott now campaigned to remove the RET, remove the HRC, fix the GST so that WA does not subsidize SA, fix the power crisis, he would romp home again. He would have his plebiscite. He would separate extremism from the many good people who want to call Australia home. We would stop handing cash to the UN and the Clintons and their like.

          We the people would feel represented again. Otherwise we face 50% renewables across the country, which means bluntly, half the power will vanish while prices go through the roof and we become a third world country, an open cut mine and tourist destination. We used to be the smart country. These is nothing smart about what our politicians are doing to our country.

          351

          • #
            el gordo

            ‘Remember Abbott was the blatant victim of an unrelenting campaign of personal vilification ….’

            The left reckon Julia Gillard was also treated abysmally, its not easy being a politician.

            If Cred had allowed back benches greater access to the PM he would probably still be running the country.

            31

            • #
              TdeF

              That’s another made up excuse for rolling the man who led them to victory, immediately before the Canning by election where Hastie romped home supported by an ‘unpopular’ PM.

              In total contrast to Turnbull, Abbott delegates and trusts. A team player. He support for Credlin, Hockey, Bishop and others is his hallmark. He even gave Malcolm and Julie Bishop ministers top portfolios while they openly plotted his downfall. Perhaps he trusts too much. Part of their lame excuses was this business about Credlin. It was a diversion, an excuse, nothing more. Ultimately Credlin’s newbie ‘bed wetters’ voted Abbott out and then they all lost their seats anyway. Credlin was right. She openly wonders why Abbott would even accept the job if it was offered to him.

              70

              • #
                el gordo

                After the first coup attempt the PM sacked Ruddock and made Scott Buchholz the chief whip, even though the back bench loathed him. He was soon rolled for making an idiotic comment about breast feeding, which could have been avoided if he had half a brain.

                At that point Tony should have opened his office to senior advisers to assist the PM on finding the chief plotters and assassinate their characters, beginning with the gang of four: Turnbull, Bishop, Hunt and Morrison.

                Its history and we’ll have to wait for their memoirs, but looking forward we have Barnaby Joyce picked to become the Infrastructure Minister. Rejoice!

                00

            • #
              Ceetee

              Is it possible that Trump and Abbott have both been attacked by the same leftist media forces (by enlarge) but Trump far better equipped to repulse those forces. Like to know what others here have to say , particularly from an Aus perspective.

              10

          • #
            Dennis

            It always amazes me how many people fall for political spin, and in the Abbott example propaganda from Labor spin doctors and from his political enemies within the Liberal Party. The chief political enemy undermined Brendan Nelson when he was voted leader after John Howard departed until he gained the leadership and as he proved to be a poor leader and was voted out and replaced by Tony Abbott in 2009 he and his rebels started to undermine his leadership and use character assassination techniques to denigrate him, and the Cabinet Secretary meaning chief of staff working for all members of cabinet, Peta Credlin.

            Yet the Abbott led Coalition effectively defeated Labor in 2010 forcing them into a minority alliance government and Labor lost a substantial number of the electorate seats they gained in 2007. In 2013 the Abbott led Coalition defeated Labor and gained government in a landslide victory.

            The politically motivated downgrading of the Abbott Government achievements, despite the hostile Senate, and despite the opposition within his cabinet, is either people repeating political propaganda without checking or his opponents maintaining their campaign to keep him out of the leadership position. So what do they fear?

            10

      • #
        TdeF

        That’s just abuse.

        30

      • #
        Dennis

        He was never a Monk, that is a description given to him by Union controlled Labor.

        And, despite the negative propaganda Abbott did as much as he could get through his cabinet and the rebels within while he was the Prime Minister. And including reducing the RET.

        20

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      With Victoria and South Australia on the precipice and holding on by their fingernails, I feel very apprehensive for our future.

      The outline at #7 gives the big picture that very few voters can come to grips with.

      The only way out of this mess is an Australian version of Brexit and Trumpit.

      Maybe Abbit???

      Whatever, we need a thorough purge of the political system, truth in public management and real accountability for actions taken.

      That SA and Victoria and Australia as a whole can be so “badly” run is treasonous.

      KK

      150

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Treasonous is very apt KK,

        the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

        Eroding the economy and infrastructure of a state to support or enact a political ideal that was fought against in two world wars is treason and grossly disrespectful to those that endured that fight and had the vision to create for what is wantonly destroyed by tyrants.

        140

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      TdeF
      For ages now your comments have been accurate and exquisitely composed, and as time goes on they become even better.
      It would be a very worthwhile enterprise to collect TdeF comments for the past couple of years, parce them into topics, and edit them to create a book.
      It seems to me that everyone else writes a book, such as Alan Moran, Tony Thomas, Andrew Bolt etc., with only a sliver of your knowledge of the topic.
      I don’t know a damned thing about publishing, but at the very least such a book could become a history of this current insanity, at par with books that were written about the plague of witch hunts in pas centuries.
      I sincerely applaud you for the extent to which you delve into these issues and the time you expend to elucidate.

      160

      • #
        TdeF

        Many thanks Rod. It is nice to be appreciated and I hope my particular skills have helped paint a clearer picture of the issues at least technically which is my expertise. I find blogs generally provide a mechanism which bypasses the media with their own fixed opinions presented as news. Twitter however is for twits.

        I am particularly passionate about the way journalists see themselves as filters of information and political activists pushing their own strong views rather than reporting the facts impartially as used to be the case and is legally an obligation of their ABC. They have destroyed Fairfax and the New York Times. This new journalism is particularly evident in the US where 95% of journalists donated to the Clinton campaign and where 98.5% of people in Washington, DC voted for Clinton. Trump called out Fake News. I am calling out Fake Science.

        However I admire Andrew Bolt for his dedication, his consistency, his unshakable principles and his refusal to give into pressure from all sides and what is clearly an incredible workload and output. He is an inspiration to many people for this. However for myself, I try to contribute as I can. The world of books, media and confrontation and politics is something else. Like the excellent Prof Geoffrey Blainey, you can get run out of town. Sufficient for now to be a contributor and commentator, not a combatant. Thanks again.

        140

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Abbott made too many mistakes before.After all HE brought in this RET. this man lacked nous full stop.

      31

      • #
        TdeF

        Yes, but this is the wisdom of hindsight. We were all fooled by this bit of inconsequential, even nonsense 2000 legislation. At a token $10 a MWhr it initially added only 1c to electricity prices and seemed a good political acceptable way to kick start the new popular windmill business buy has morphed recently into a monster gobbling up whole power stations and sending our gas overseas. It means Hazelwood which is running flat out 24/7 is closing because it cannot make a dollar profit.

        What I like about Abbott is that he admits his mistakes, eventually. Some though were mistakes created entirely by the media who neglected to mention for example that the Queen had specifically asked for a free birthday honour for Prince Phillip. We were never told this and it was presented as Abbott’s lack of judgement. We are still a Commonwealth country and the head of our government is still the Queen of England, even if the ABC/SBS and Malcolm himself think Malcolm should be President.

        110

        • #
          TdeF

          As for nous, he did beat three Labor PMs. He beat Malcolm. He ran a concrete company, worked as a journalist, won a Rhodes scholarship and has three degrees, one in Economics. Still a very active sportsman he has personally risked his life many times to rescue people in the surf and in bushfires, spends two weeks a year with aborigines and eschews life as a rich person. He is much respected around the world and does have a Masters in International Politics from Oxford. Nous? It depends on how you define it but he is a man of conviction, a man of principle and as such is ridiculed by Malcolm’s ABC as the Mad Monk. Any excuses for removing him from his job are now absurd. He is our only real hope to remove this RET.

          110

          • #
            Dennis

            You have touched on one area of Abbott’s impressive track record, bushfire brigade volunteer officer, of many years service. And that reminded me of a media attempt to deny him credit. During January 2014 just after Abbott became PM he travelled with his crew to the far south coast of NSW to fight fires and just after the fire truck arrived media took photographs of Abbott at the steering wheel.

            It was later reported that he had indulged in a photo opportunity and the untrustworthy, unprofessional media suggested that he was not working.

            50

          • #
            Glen Michel

            Well we need to have some faith and hope in a leader that encapsulates a vision( dare I say it) for this country. I espouse a large amount of reactionary views because I fear modernism/progressivism lacks common sense.I certainly respect TdeF and many others views and inputs. We need a strong pragmatic leader. Soon.

            10

      • #
        Dennis

        Maybe, but the Howard Government was taken in by the UN IPCC Kyoto Conference misleading information and warnings, but they were wise enough to sign but refuse to ratify that agreement. Instead they established a Greenhouse Office with the objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (that was the basis for concern until the alarmists decided “carbon (CO2) pollution” was a better marketing tool) by pratical measures without damaging the economy.

        If the UN IPCC now known to be badly flawed research material had been exposed earlier maybe many of the governments taken in would have backed away?

        20

  • #
    lewispbuckingham

    Six years ago Origin Energy was ‘Working towards making sustainable energy affordable energy’

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUnXPGzAkdM

    A few minutes ago they were televising an ad about saving the planet with a whole lot of wind farms in the background.
    The propaganda war has started with a bait,affordable sustainability, to the switch, price gouging,saving the planet, and by the way, electricity when we chose to provide it is the message that is being hidden.
    We cannot trust them to come up with affordable energy now.

    210

    • #
      PeterS

      This country has gone mad. Our electricity prices are skyrocketing and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Given they are already several multiples greater than most other countries how can our industry compete and hence our economy survive? Of course they can’t if things continue as they are. Clearly we will have to learn our lesson the hard way.

      130

  • #

    What’s the prob? You can make a pretty good submarine by candlelight. (Sets available at Hobbyco.)

    150

    • #
      TdeF

      You have to wonder if manned submarines even make sense in the new world of drones.

      Joseph Kennedy, older brother of John Kennedy died in an early drone after this 50th mission. He would have been President. Joseph was piloting 12 tonnes of radio controlled high explosive to blow up a rail gun in France. It detonated by accident. The plan was to abandon the flying fortress which was then flown by remote control by radio with two early TVs for vision. I did not know any of this. Drones are not new.

      The Japanese used manned torpedoes at the end of the war. So trust Australia to try again to build slow WW2 submarines to patrol 37,000km of coast when assault from the air and missiles have obsoleted them. Air or sea based drones could stay on station for days but we are maybe building yet another group of one off obsolete submarines because the last ones were utterly useless.

      It’s all about jobs in Adelaide, like most big projects. The problem is, no one really intends to make this happen anyway. Turnbull is anti war, anti defence, like his entire family back to Great Uncle George Lansbury who thought Hitler a humble Christian who lacked ambition.

      160

      • #

        Well, I must admit I’d find it hard to refuse an offer from our future submarine suppliers:

        “In 2006, Altantuya Shaariibuu, a beautiful 28-year-old jet-setting Mongolian translator, was dragged from a car in patch of jungle on the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur and shot twice in the head as she begged for the life of her unborn child, according to court testimony. Two former police bodyguards of Mr Najib wrapped her body in C4 explosives obtained from the military and blew her up, ensuring the foetus was destroyed along with any chance of identifying the father. Ms Shaariibuu worked as a translator for the Malaysian side in the final stages of the DCNS deal. She admitted in a letter shortly before her death that she had been demanding $500,000 in return for her silence about millions of dollars in alleged corrupt payments.” – SMH

        Thales, which has a big share of DCNS, also can be very persuasive:

        “The French state and defence electronics group Thales will have to pay a record fine of 630 million euros ($920.2 million) for bribes in the 1991 sale of frigates to Taiwan, a court ruled on Thursday.” – Reuters

        Mind you, DCNS have been willing to provide us stealthy, silent diesel subs, instead of noisy nukes. We’ll be the only ones with a fleet like that in 2070 (if all goes well with Adelaide unions, SA power supply and future Brotherhood governments in France).

        120

    • #
      Dennis

      It will be ok, the ADF have agreed to spend millions of taxpayer’s dollars to install a diesel generator within the shipbuilding yard.

      20

      • #
        David Maddison

        They claim it will be $20 million but I’d be willing to bet they pay the “special government price” so it will be at least double that and won’t be delivered on time.

        20

  • #
    Pauly

    And now for something entirely serendipitous:
    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/looming-gas-shortage-will-threaten-nations-power-supplies/8337204

    SA and NSW could face gas shortages this winter. Thank goodness NSW still has coal fired power stations.

    60

    • #
      Dennis

      And as Tony pointed out a few times, just one of the NSW coal fired power stations, Bayswater in the Hunter Valley, can continuously supply much more electricity than all of the wind turbines around Australia could if they were all in operation at the same time.

      20

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I told my elderly parents when they built thier house to make sure it had enough solar to run stand alone if needed, based on the lunacy of the green influence in this world.

      Looks like i was right.

      Also discovered that as a landlord in NSW, tenants can “complain” if their rental property isnt “water efficient” ( oh the poor darlings…) and means as a landlord that I cant make them pay their water usage ( required by law ) if I fall short of the eco-disneyland water efficiency laws – only applies to showers and wash basins, not baths, washing machines, outdoor taps or dishwashers…..

      To quote Yoda:

      The eco-loon influence is strong, yes it is…..mmm….

      10

  • #
    Mikky

    Electricity rationing and a 3-day week will be needed WHEN (not if) Torrens power station closes:

    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-power-crisis-torrens-island-power-station-reaching-end-of-life/news-story/a2246cf442896d927233ae76b4127d8c

    Tasmanians must be chuckling, after their recent Basslink problem they are now sitting pretty, thanks to being relatively immune to politicians and their beloved “targets”, though no doubt that won’t stop the fundamentalist wing of the zealots.

    50

    • #
      Robdel

      We could do with a modern coal fired station in the Fingal valley as a backup when the dam levels deplete during a drought, to supply base power. There is coal in the fingal valley.

      20

      • #
        Rod Stuart

        The tune I have been singing since they started talking about another Bass Link.
        Had the money already invested in giant fans at Woolnorth and Musselroe Bay been invested in conventional coal fired generation in the Fingle valley, there would be no need for concern about drought or the vagaries of Victoria gas prices. Nor concern about South32 and Bell Bay Aluminium closing up shop.
        I’ve even made this case with the members for Bass. You can imagine how much interest they have.

        30

  • #
    pat

    comment is in moderation re: ABC: Nick Harmsen: South Australia’s power woes expose deeper problems with nation’s energy security

    which tells some truths about wind power.

    not so either of these pieces, which are pure politicking:

    9 Mar: ABC 7.30 Report: AUDIO: 6mins32secs: The energy debate heats up
    Australia may be an energy superpower internationally, with coal and gas exports, but it is in danger of becoming an energy weakling at home, as the country’s energy market operator warns of blackouts unless a gas shortage is sorted out.
    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2017/s4633490.htm

    9 Mar: ABC 7.30 Report: AUDIO: 6mins31secs: Soaring energy prices stretch rural businesses to breaking point
    Rising electricity prices are forcing rural businesses to look for alternative energy sources. But it’s not renewables they’re turning to – they’re going back to diesel.
    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2017/s4633511.htm

    40

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    Well at least they took a really sucky song and made it better.

    32

  • #
    pat

    SBS happy to carry AAP, which is still pushing INTERMITTENT ENERGY aka “renewables”:

    9 Mar: SBS: AAP: Turnbull to act on power prices, shortage
    Meanwhile an inquiry into the electricity system has been told prices are set to remain high while there is uncertainty over the rules and while there is no plan for what happens after old coal-fired power stations are closed.
    “We are running out of power,” the Australian Energy Council warned in its submission to the Finkel review.
    It recommends states wind back their own renewable energy targets, as part of a return to a national policy.
    However, a major study released on Thursday found that renewables were now Australia’s cheapest energy option, even when the cost of storage to make the intermittent power sources reliable was added.

    And “clean coal” using carbon capture and storage technology won’t be commercially viable until 2030 at the earliest, meaning it won’t help Australia meet its Paris Agreement emissions reduction obligations, energy market analyst RepuTex says…
    The Lock the Gate Alliance, which has been successful in lobbying against unconventional gas development in agricultural areas, said instead of meeting with gas chiefs Mr Turnbull should be bringing together the renewable energy industry.
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/03/09/turnbull-act-power-prices-shortage

    meanwhile…

    9 Mar: UK Times: Emily Gosden: Wind of change means new set of controls
    Britain’s system for controlling the soaring costs of green energy subsidies is to be abolished and replaced with new controls in the last year of the present parliament (Emily Gosden writes).
    The Levy Control Framework was established in 2011, setting an annual cap on the costs levied on energy bills to support wind, solar and other renewables. The cost was due to rise to £7.6 billion in 2020-21, but spending is forecast to hit almost £9 billion, or £110 per household per year. The overspend has led to widespread criticism that the design and implementation of the framework has been ineffectual.
    The government had promised to set out the long-term future of the levy mechanism in the budget. Instead it announced that it would be “replaced by a new set of controls” that would be “set out later in the year”…

    The Renewable Energy Association said that the announcement meant increased uncertainty for investors. “The industry was expecting an announcement regarding the future budget levels and structure but this has been delayed and instead we face a new regime and no clarity on the proposed new ‘set of controls’,” it said…
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wind-of-change-means-new-set-ofcontrols-hsxzgmxsq

    20

  • #
    PeterS

    It still amazes me to hear all the talk heads from every corner, be they for or against the global warming scare ignoring the elephant in the room. Australia is deliberately moving away from coal for base load power generation while the rest of the world is going the opposite direction despite all the talk about worldwide renewable targets. For instance Japan is to get over 40 of them. India is building the equivalent capacity of over 100 Hazelwoods as we speak. Literally hundreds and hundreds of coal fired power stations are going to be built over the next few years. I just don’t understand people like Andrew Bolt isn’t challenging our politicians and telling his wide audience all about those facts. I’m beginning to wonder if he and many others like him are just simply dumb or fakes.

    100

    • #
      TdeF

      Bolt could not be more anti Global Warming if he tried. However he is more a political and social warrior, fighting for free speech, a fair society and freedom from political correctness. It is not for him to point out the obvious that politicians are destroying our energy security, although he has done so many times. The problem is the RET. No one understands how this is really a carbon tax because the devious wording of the legislation hides it all.

      However the RET has all the elements.
      1. A certificate you must surrender to the Clean Energy Regulator if you want to buy 1MWhr of fossil fuel electricity. Currently $89.
      2. This cash goes to anyone who can demonstrate they produce 1MWhr of non fossil fuel electricity, whether or not they sell it.
      3. the payment is additional to any money paid or not paid for the non fossil fuel electricity
      4. Solar system installers get 15 years of carbon taxes paid in advance to STCs, smaller certificates. Cashed in by the installers.
      5. The money does not go to the government but directly to the wind/solar cartels who send it overseas.
      6. The current cost in carbon tax is $50 a tonne for coal, $100 a tonne for gas. 2x to 4x Gillard’s Carbon Tax.

      So when your electicity company pays 11c a KW/hr for electricity, 8.9c does not go to Hazelwood. They are running at full tilt and cannot make money, so they are closing. The middle men take another 29c for poles and wires and doing little else.

      By the way, Victoria spends $100million just trimming trees away from power lines instead of putting them underground like WA. The electricity money go round never stops. The only losers? You, the public who gets sold wind power and solar and the highest priced electricity in the world with third world reliability. This is not a problem for Bolt of fairness or equality or free speech or keeping politicians honest, it is a problem for everyone. Sir John Monash, general and engineer, would be rolling in his grave at what politicians are doing to our electricity.

      182

      • #
        toorightmate

        TdeF,
        Why try to complicate things?
        CO2 IS NOT A PROBLEM.

        101

        • #
          TdeF

          The RET only targets ‘fossil fuel’ and the only output of combustion of fossil fuel is CO2 + H2O. Sure both harmless but we are paying a massive compulsory tax on carbon based fuels. Worse, it is going to private companies, not to our government.

          140

        • #
          Ross Stacey

          Agree. All Deniers are just puffing and panting pointing out the stupidity of the present programs. These will never be changed until we can get everyone to agree that CO2 is not a problem. I have been convinced, however, politicians will never act because they haven’t the guts to stand up and support the facts.
          We need more published science from Scientists to change the consensus. If that is done then all the fallacious appeals to “insurance for the future ” can be wiped out.

          00

      • #
        PeterS

        You also have fallen for the same trap as Andrew Bolt. It appears I’m the only one who can see the elephant in the room. Re-read my post.

        11

      • #
        PeterS

        In case people are still scratching their heads wondering what the elephant in the room is please let me explain. Australia is the largest exporter of coal to countries all over the world who use coal fired power stations for the foreseeable future, probably for much of the rest of this century. Those countries are building many more coal fired power stations. The total around the world is somewhere in the order of 1,000 new ones over the coming years. Despite all this Australia refuses to build even one coal fired power station all in the name of fighting man-made global warming. It appears we are doing it alone! Go figure. We are definitely the stupid country, and I’m not referring just to the politicians. In fact on the contrary. The real blame rests on the people who vote for the parties that follow this economic suicidal path. We get the government we deserve.

        80

    • #
      clive

      Don’t believe every thing you hear from”The Bolta”He speaketh with a forked tongue.

      04

      • #
        Dennis

        The more his opponents complain about Bolt’s truths the more they do themselves discredit for being gullible alarmists.

        Despite the truth: Socialism masquerading as environmentalism.

        20

  • #

    You guys have probably already seen this. Eric Worrall has a piece in WUWT on deepening energy crisis in Oz. Cheers -

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/09/green-craziness-deepening-aussie-energy-crisis/

    80

  • #
    Gary

    Might be interesting to keep track of this sort of demise. I expect that climate “extinction” rates will begin to rise.

    40

  • #
    • #
      Mark M

      I chanced upon a thread via Adams’s twitter account and found this link:

      When Asked To Show Evidence Of Man-Made Warming, Scientists Can’t Do It

      http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/when-asked-to-show-evidence-of-man-made-warming-scientists-cant-do-it/

      “Consider a recent exchange in Australia, in which a skeptic, parliament member Malcolm Roberts, asked scientists at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization to convince him that there was proof of man-made global warming.

      Then the Morning Herald noted, in a paraphrase, that Finkel conceded that “the effect of warming on climate wasn’t clear.”

      It followed with a direct quotation from Finkel, which was actually an admission.

      “We have models to try to predict what that will be and that’s difficult,” said Finkel.

      Difficult. And wrong.”

      130

    • #
      Peter C

      Scott Adams said

      I don’t know much about science, and even less about climate science. So as a practical matter, I like to side with the majority of scientists until they change their collective minds. They might be wrong, but their guess is probably better than mine.

      That said, it is mind-boggling to me that the scientific community can’t make a case for climate science that sounds convincing, even to some of the people on their side, such as me. In other words, I think scientists are right (because I play the odds), but I am puzzled by why they can’t put together a convincing argument, whereas the skeptics can, and easily do. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

      Strange that after that he cannot draw the right conclusion.

      30

  • #
    Mark M

    And in what could be interpreted as a blatant attempt to suck up to our hosts …

    This is a good opportunity to remind readers jonova relies on the odd coin being thrown their way.
    We’re all doing this for no money.

    On the other hand, the forces assembled against us are massive.
    For many years now, the United Nations, national as well as local governments, Fortune 500 corporations, nearly all of the media, and activists from small church groups to multinational players have vigorously promoted the view that human activity has triggered dangerous climate change.

    Those of us who dissent from mainstream thinking about climate change truly are voices in the wilderness, analogous to the Rebel Alliance in the fictional Star Wars’ universe. Scattered, underfunded, thin-on-the-ground – that’s us.” (Donna Laframboise)
    . . .
    The Climate Institute closed down – One less source of fabricated climate propaganda.
    Winning.

    80

  • #
    Another Ian

    Jo

    FYI


    Your Moral And Intellectual Superiors
    By Kate on March 9, 2017 12:16 AM | 10 Comments

    The science is settled: Here is definitive proof that reporters are the laziest people on the planet.”

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2017/03/your-moral-and-408.html

    50

  • #
    TdeF

    It is possible our politicians really do not understand the RET which is actually the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000. For 17 years it has been slowly crippling our electricity supplies. Even Gillard on election immediately brought in her Carbon Tax, having made an absolute promise not to do so. It was her first act. However the RET was more subtle, not a tax at all in that the money was collected by the government. In all other aspects identical, it is hidden by law in your electricity bills and the act does not mention carbon once. It taxes by exclusion so that free certificates are given to generators of ‘eligible’ electricity and must be purchased by generators of ‘non eligible’ electricity. How devious is that?

    So why debate raged, the Greens celebrated, Abbott was vilified, the battle over a government collected up front Carbon Tax raged and was the big issue in three elections. Meanwhile the devious RET made it impossible for gas and coal electricity producers to continue. The issue of a ‘Target’ has no force in law. It is a cover word for Tax. Even Malcolm Turnbull betrayed his own party in 2010 in support of a Carbon Tax, but his old company Goldmann Sachs was the major beneficiary of both the GFC and the Carbon Tax.

    Now he presides over a government which pretends the $50 a tonne Carbon Tax does not exist, while power stations close left and right and are declared not commercially viable by their owners. Nothing to do with his government. Bill Shorten plays the game, demanding that his Labor governments increase the ‘Target’, as if there is such a thing. The Target is just a measure of how many gas and coal power stations have closed as gas is also a ‘target’ of the RET. With lower CO2 output the tax on gas CO2 is $100 a tonne.

    At the same time governments including Liberal Governments have banned gas exploration, banned fracking, refused to build dams and denied freedom of speech. Labor claims it is championing jobs while shutting factories. They even drove Toyota out of the country in the High court, demanding that Toyota was not allowed to deal directly with its employees. The Liberals are too busy fighting for Gay rights to fight for Freedom of Speech and like Labor, fired the man who led them to victory.

    Our problem is that Gillard was not the only politician to say one thing to win government and immediately do the reverse. The mainstream media, as in the US, believe they are the opposition and scientists only are free to tell the truth when they retire from public life, or they lose their jobs. This is from Chief Scientist down.

    Hanson is the only one we can trust. She went to jail for six months for money she repaid and a matter of timing when major twisted politicians like Slipper and Thompson walk free. However Hanson is also the victim of every opportunist in the country.

    The key to this all is Donald Trump. Only he channeled the public anger at Fake News, Fake Science and Fake Politicians, exemplified by ‘there will be no carbon tax in a Government I lead’. For 17 years we have had a carbon tax, only obvious now because the LGCs are trading at $89 a Megawatt hour. Even in 2015 it was $50 a MWatt hour. It is hard to get historical data on the price of LGCs except that it has been as low as $10 per MWhr. At 10x that price, of course coal and gas geneators are shut out of business. Your have to pay double for fossil power what you have to pay for the electricity itself.

    It is urgent that the RET is removed immediately. It is critical that Hazelwood is not closed. However the Liberal/Nationals are saying nothing while every Labor/Green government is cheering the destruction of our country, jobs, manufacturing. All for nothing. The temperature has not changed in 20 years, something the BOM and CSIRO and Chief Scientist refuse to say. Fire the lot.

    180

    • #
      Robber

      TdeF, you are right. We should all refer to the RET as a tax.
      You can watch the challenges AEMO faces in balancing supply/demand with intermittent wind/solar in real time, and see how much SA is dependent on those Vic interconnectors when the wind isn’t blowing. Then imagine how much more difficult it will be each year towards 2020 when wind/solar are required by legislation to be 2.5 times greater than today.

      70

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Your finest piece yet , Tdef .
      Have you considered a career in politics , or do you prefer to earn an honest living .

      40

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      It is interesting to examine the “tax efficiency” of the RET legislation, especially in light of the fact that it only INCREASES the cost of a commodity, WITHOUT actually augnmenting government revenue.
      This essay delves into the efficiency cost of poorly designed burdens on prices. Not only does this burden produce nothing of value; it destroys the capability of the economy to produce wealth.
      Only a little thought is required to realise that the RET was specifically designed to damage the country to the greatest extent possible.
      It is not possible to provide evidence for a charge that the Commonwealth government actually served an objective to damage the economy to the greatest extent possible.
      However, I do maintain that had our government created such an objective, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NECESSARY FOR IT TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERAENT THAN IT DID!

      30

    • #
      Dennis

      I am not a Hanson opponent however, having observed her 1990s Queensland performances and fall, and now her revival campaign, I believe that she means well but beyond her often flawed headline statements (vaccinations recently and apology following from her) she cannot articulate her policy, she is rarely across the subject she chooses to put forward. The musical chairs of One Nation candidates is a worry too. And, as you correctly reported about the suspended prison sentence, suspended by a court of appeal as being too harsh, One Nation was required to repay the taxpayer’s monies obtained based on membership figures that were incorrect, that was part of the judgement that included suspending the prison sentence. And she called on her supporters to donate the money owed.

      I cannot bring myself to vote for either major political party, Labor is by far the worst choice in my view, Liberals a somewhat better choice, Nationals I could vote for. But like the Greens that support Labor I consider One Nation to be the opposite side minor party that has little chance of forming even state government in Queensland. But on the other hand I would place One Nation well ahead of the Greens.

      00

  • #
    Antoine

    the dominoes start to fall

    40

  • #
    Robdel

    Music to m ears. Let us hope the end is permanent.

    20

  • #
    David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

    Morning all,
    This was only recently reported, but is most cheering to me:

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-10/new-epa-chief-says-man-made-c02-not-to-blame-for-global-warming/8342052

    Add the name Pruitt and you get the news quite quickly.
    Cheers,
    Dave B

    80

  • #
    David Maddison

    I just hope the government or some rich Leftist Elitist like Soros doesn’t step in and provide funding.

    20

  • #
    Albert

    I read the ‘Climate Institute’ made $4 million from their first climate scare. They have regular scares promoted on all media, I can’t believe they have a funding problem. I believe they are getting out as people are waking up to their lies

    70

  • #
    pat

    the source of the Pruitt comments that have fired up the CAGW-zealous MSM:

    9 Mar: CNBC: Tom DiChristopher: EPA chief Scott Pruitt says carbon dioxide is not a primary contributor to global warming
    “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
    “But we don’t know that yet. … We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”…
    Pruitt also called the Paris Agreement, an international accord aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change, “a bad deal.” He said it puts the United States on a different playing field than developing countries like China and India.
    The United States has vowed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. In comparison, China has committed to reach peak carbon emissions levels by 2030, but will try to reach that point sooner.

    “I happen to think the Paris accord, the Paris treaty, or the Paris Agreement, if you will, should have been treated as a treaty, should have gone through senate confirmation. That’s a concern,” he said.
    The Paris Agreement was negotiated by the State Department, and future adherence to U.S. commitments made under Obama will be guided by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson…READ ALL
    http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html

    50

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      I don’t think the EPA will be able to prove Co2 is doing anything else than greening the earth , and that’s where this 30 year fraud will fall down .

      30

  • #
    Egor the One

    ‘the climate council’ ? Who are these scammers? Why do we need a council , an authority, a global HQ etc on such a racket.

    These Marxist/Totalitarian ratbags need rounding up , not just simply allowed to go belly up.

    All flogging this scam should be immediately defunded and prosecuted for racketeering, no ifs , no buts.

    Also our Universities in particular need to be purged of these CAGW propaganda trash talkers !

    50

  • #

    Why am I not drowning in crocodile tears?

    Could it be the real possibility that those who believe that we can change the weather will soon be elected in Western Australia; prepared to continue the payment of indulgences out of the pockets of those with the least resources to avoid payment?

    Even those who are not believers; will see damage being done to prosperity but raise no more than a whisper due to political expediency.

    40

    • #
      AndyG55

      If WA goes down the wind/solar route, they will end up by not being able to run their desalination plants.

      So, No electricity, No water.

      Maybe the place will become a ghost town.. but only BECAUSE OF the green agenda.

      10

      • #
        Dennis

        And no interconnector electricity lifeline interstate to fossil fuel fired power stations.

        20

      • #
        Robber

        THE operator of Victoria’s troubled desalination plant has shipped in dozens of diesel generators in a desperate bid to deliver the Andrews Government’s first water order.

        The Herald Sun can reveal Aquasure has been forced to find a back-up electricity source for the Wonthaggi plant amid ongoing concerns of a major power cable fault. The Herald Sun understands about 30 containers are being delivered to set up the multi-generator power system, which would use about 150,000 litres of diesel a day.

        The company has until June 30 to deliver 50GL of water, but serious doubts have emerged about it meeting that deadline. Mr Brassington said all power would be offset by the purchase and surrender of renewable energy certificates.

        I thought it was going to be powered by windmills!

        30

      • #

        If we end up with a Green Laborious government, I’m buying a diesel generator.

        00

  • #
    Mark M

    2008: Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme: $1 a day to save planet

    “THE Rudd Government has moved to ease fears about the impact of its emissions trading scheme, releasing Treasury modelling showing the scheme is affordable, with households paying up to $7 a week more for electricity and gas, and no industries forced offshore.”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/business-old/a-dollar-a-day-to-save-the-planet/news-story/0c5735a3f4e702c9d7dd2264658c4758
    . . .
    How’s that working out for you?

    10

    • #
      Mark M

      Make that $! a year!

      KEVIN RUDD: In terms of the whole economy what the modelling from MMA demonstrates is that the total impact on the economy will be marginal over time.
      That is that they calculate that between now and about 2045 that you’d be looking at a total impact on the economy of somewhere between $600 and $800 million or something in the vicinity of $45 per person over that period of time or something like $1 per person per year

      http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2007/s2076131.htm .

      20

      • #
        David Maddison

        No one seems to valudate their “models” any more. Neither does anyone these days know about GIGO, garbage in, garbage out, especially in relation to climate “models”.

        00

  • #
    toorightmate

    As the song goes:
    “I’m so excited
    I just can’t hide it”.

    The CO2 horsesh*t has to stop.

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    The Climate Institute: Is this a separate organisation to the Office of Climate Change that Tom Foolery used to operate with taxpayer’s funding until the Abbott Government cancelled that funding?

    00

  • #
    pat

    David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz – comment #24 – provided ABC link for Pruitt story – note headline in the URL:

    “NEW EPA CHIEF SAYS MAN MADE CO2 NOT TO BLAME FOR GLOBAL WARMING”

    ABC has changed the headline of their ABC/Reuters piece to:

    “Global warming not PRIMARILY caused by CO2, says Donald Trump’s environment chief Scott Pruitt”

    virulently anti-Trump NY Daily News also had piece, with wire services:

    EPA chief says carbon dioxide not to blame for global warming
    New York Daily News · 1 hour ago

    makes one wonder if this was Reuters’ original headline?

    WUWT having fun with WaPo/Chris Mooney coverage. note comments exposing FakeNewsMSM coverage elsewhere:

    9 Mar: WUWT: From the No Schist, Sherlock Files: “On Climate Change, Pruitt Contradicts EPA’s Own Website”
    Guest post by David Middleton
    COMMENTS:
    Dave G: The BBC are fake-newsing this article on the grounds that Pruitt discounts *CO2* as contributory to global warming when he was clearly referring to MAN-MADE CO2.
    JW: The UK Guardian is doing the same. They portray him attacking their ‘god’ CO2
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/09/from-the-no-schist-sherlock-files-on-climate-change-pruitt-contradicts-epas-own-website/comment-page-1/

    00

  • #
    David Maddison

    I can’t wait until Hazelwood shuts down and the electricity crisis that will follow.

    It might be the wake up call that the sheeple, the public serpents and the politicians require.

    20

  • #
    pat

    Reuters would indeed seem to have sent out misleading headlines. with so many Reuters’ hacks involved, it has to be intentional:

    9 Mar: Reuters: EPA chief unconvinced on CO2 link to global warming
    By Doina Chiacu and Valerie Volcovici | WASHINGTON
    (Additional reporting by Timothy Gardner and Ernest Scheyder in Houston; Editing by Eric Walsh, Dan Grebler and Bernard Orr)
    Scientists immediately criticized Pruitt’s statement, saying it ignores a large body of evidence collected over decades that shows fossil fuel burning as the main factor in climate change.
    “We can’t afford to reject this clear and compelling scientific evidence when we make public policy. Embracing ignorance is not an option,” Ben Santer, climate researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said in a statement…

    The Republican-controlled Congress could potentially issue a strong signal to the EPA that carbon dioxide should not be regulated by the agency, a move that would undermine many Obama-era rules aimed at curbing emissions.
    “Administrator Pruitt is correct, the Congress has never explicitly given the EPA the authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant and the committee has no plans to do so,” said Mike Danylak, spokesman for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the panel that oversees the EPA…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-epa-pruitt-idUSKBN16G1XX?il=0

    9 Mar: Cyprus-Mail: Reuters: EPA chief casts doubt on carbon dioxide’s role in global warming
    http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-says-congress-weigh-whether-carbon-dioxide-pollutant/

    00

  • #
    pat

    funnier than the WaPo piece.
    Atlantic’s Robinson Meyer (only mention on LinkedIn besides The Atlantic, is his education: Bachelor of Arts (BA), Music, Northwestern University):

    9 Mar: The Atlantic: Trump’s EPA Chief Denies the Basic Science of Climate Change
    He has no evidence. He’ll successfully mislead people anyway.
    “Do you believe that it’s been proven that CO2 is the PRIMARY CONTROL KNOB on climate?” asked Joe Kernen, a host on the show…
    The scientific evidence on THIS question – does carbon dioxide, as emitted by human activity cause climate change? – has been available for decades. Since the late 1070s, climate scientists have SUGGESTED that the accumlation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere MIGHT CAUSE global warming…
    Already the Sierra Club has called for Pruitt to resign, alleging that he misled Congress in his testimony about global warming. Some seior U.S. climate and atmospheric scientists have joined their call…
    “Pruitt has demonstrated that he is unqualified to run the EPA or any agency,” said Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, in a statement responding to Pruitt’s Squawk Box appearance. “There is no doubt whatsoever that the planet is warming and it is PRIMARILY due to increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels.”
    And yet, few minds are likely to change as a result of this debate…
    The long, grinding fight to convince the public of the reality of global warming will be set back once again.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/trumps-epa-chief-rejects-that-carbon-dioxide-emissions-cause-climate-change/519054/

    00

  • #
    pat

    no surprise HuffPo misleads:

    Donald Trump’s EPA Chief Scott Pruitt Denies Carbon Dioxide Causes Global Warming by Jack Sommers
    Huffington Post UK – ‎5 hours ago‎

    8 Mar: Washington Times: Steve Milloy: Revisiting the original climate sin
    The EPA should be forced to prove its greenhouse gas endangerment finding
    If President Trump wants to put an end to the hoax and economic disaster that is man-made catastrophic global warming hysteria, there’s one order that is essential to issue: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must reopen its “endangerment finding” for greenhouse gases…
    The endangerment finding was born in corruption and has aged worse…

    There is reason to believe, based on EPA staff emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, that the Obama EPA may have predetermined the outcome of the endangerment finding before the rulemaking process commenced. These emails show a disturbing history of Obama EPA staff working covertly with green activist groups to shape major regulatory efforts like the Clean Power Plan.
    So it is quite conceivable, if not likely, that similar collusion occurred with the endangerment finding. This collusion could easily be investigated by the Trump administration, providing the Obama EPA staff didn’t destroy federal records on its way out the door…

    The endangerment finding was issued in the wake of the revelations from the November 2009 Climategate scandal, which revealed, among other things, efforts by parts of the climate science community to manipulate scientific data and study results, to cover up such manipulation and to silence critics. Although the EPA’s endangerment finding (as well as the political climate amid which the Massachusetts v. EPA decision was issued) relied in great part on the controversial Climategate data and studies, the agency refused to reopen the public comment period for the endangerment finding to explore the ramifications and implications of Climategate.
    The endangerment finding is also scientifically suspect. It ignored the then-ongoing global warming pause that we may possibly still be experiencing…

    If all that is not enough, Mr. Trump should realize that even if he were to repeal the Obama Clean Power Plan but leave the endangerment finding behind, the green activist groups and their state allies will take him to court and force his EPA to issue his own Trump power plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That will not help to fulfill any campaign pledges about unleashing the American energy industry…

    The process should be open and transparent — for the first time providing a forum for climate skeptics and alarmists to debate in public. Bring your best science and leave the invective and ad hominem attacks at home. May the most persuasive side win. But by all means, let’s finally have this vital debate.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/8/climate-change-must-be-proven-by-epa/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

    10

  • #
    pat

    FakeNews? possibly. anonymous source. time will tell:

    9 Mar: E&E News: Evan Lehmann: The Clean Power Plan is gone — and there’s no ‘replace’
    The White House will unveil an executive order next week instructing U.S. EPA to “revise or rescind” the Clean Power Plan and offering no alternative, a source tells E&E News…REGISTRATION REQD
    http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/03/09/stories/1060051196

    9 Mar: Daily Caller: Michael Bastasch: Trump’s Executive Order Targeting EPA Has One Huge Omission
    The White House will issue an executive order next week to “revise or rescind” a regulation that’s the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s global warming agenda.
    President Donald Trump will also order the Department of Justice to stop defending the Obama-era regulation, a source told E&E News, adding the executive order will not order a review of the 2009 endangerment finding underpinning EPA’s legal authority to issue global warming rules.
    “That is a huge issue,” the source told E&E News. “That’s just going to require a lot of thinking.”…

    “[G]reen activist groups and their state allies will take him to court and force his EPA to issue his own Trump power plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Steve Milloy, a former Trump transition team member and senior legal fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, wrote in The Washington Times…

    The source told E&E News a new rule will be proposed after the CPP is rescinded or revised. “After accepting more comment, the action will be finalized,” E&E News reported. The only uncertainty is the timeline.
    Trump will have some leeway since the Clean Air Act doesn’t establish a strict timeline by which the EPA has to issue a regulation on greenhouse gases from power plants.
    “They don’t need to replace the CPP right away but could wait for a while to development another program,” Jeff Holmstead, an attorney at Bracewell LLP and former deputy EPA administrator in the George W. Bush administration, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    “If they do this, it will be very different from the CPP,” Holmstead said.
    Holmstead said Trump’s replacement for the CPP could “be based on efficiency improvements that can be made to reduce the CO2 emission rates at individual power plants.”
    “States will be given flexibility in deciding on the CO2 emission rate standards that will apply to each of the existing plants within their borders,” Holmstead said…
    http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/09/trumps-executive-order-targeting-epa-has-one-huge-omission/

    00

  • #

    Joanne’s Post has this in the text: (my bolding here)

    Best known for its Climate of the Nation reports, the organisation also helped, among other things, expand the renewable energy target in 2008.

    And it did a wonderful at expanding that Renewable Energy Target too.

    We now have a case where we have around 2500 wind tower generators on poles, at more than 43 Wind Farms Plants. (Please don’t call them Farms)

    You know, generating in total across the last eight days of average (30%) wind plant generation a total power of …..

    14.2% LESS than what was delivered by 53 year old Hazelwood for the same eight days

    and Hazelwood closes in three weeks from now.

    That’s impressive work this climate council did.

    Hazelwood Power Plant Closing 31st March – Currently Delivering More Power Than Every Wind Plant In Australia

    Tony.

    30

    • #

      Around 2,500 generators on poles.

      Currently actually turning (Midday Thursday) ….. umm, about 60 of them for 100MW total from a Nameplate of 3900MW.

      You know, 0.43% of Australia’s total power consumption as of Midday.

      I am just so thrilled!!!!!

      Tony.

      41

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        G’day Tony,
        This extract from today”s SMH has some numbers you’ll love.

        “When Hazelwood generates its last electricity at the end of this month it will be the ninth coal power station to close in the past five years. Last year, Australia retired 520 megawatts of coal, and built 1100 megawatts of renewable energy. This year, with the closure of Hazelwood, at least 1640 megawatts of coal will exit the market, and more than 3000 megawatts of renewables will be built. This shift is only heading in one direction, and it’s accelerating. ”

        The author: “Mark Wakeham is CEO of Environment Victoria.”, and the link:
        http://www.smh.com.au/comment/-guu4fq.html

        Surely someone with such an esteemed title wouldn’t be attempting to confuse us with numbers? 1640 v 3000 sounds like there’s nothing to worry about, but isn’t that 1640 x 24/7 at something over 90% v 3000 x (say) 8 sometimes, at about 30%?

        The word I like to use to describe this, in my polite moments, is obfuscation.
        Cheers,
        Dave B

        50

      • #
        peter

        Hi Tony,
        Could Fed Government take over Hazelwood and operate it? Is that a practical thing to do to prevent further power crisis on the east coast?

        Do you have any comment on those academics who say we could build small water storage dams (lots of no doubt) to provide hydro-power storage back-up with 100% renewables?

        And do you have any comment on Tesla’s offer to blackout-proof SA grid with their battery banks. They have said they can do this in 100 days or SA gets it free. This whole power thing is becoming so unreal it’s starting to make my head spin. Help me please ?

        10

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Elon musk has just said he will supply Adelaide with battery back up sufficient to get them through within 100 days or it’s free .
    Be afraid SA be very afraid , Josh frydenberg is salivating at the proposal and wants in .

    10

  • #
    It doesn't add up...

    Do we have enough information to work out whether Elon Musk is about to donate 100-300MWh of his batteries to South Australia?

    Bold offer reported in the UK Guardian

    10

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Musk isn’t going to donate anything, the 100 days is from contract signature date, which he presumably can deliver on as he can divert as much of the Gigafactory output to the project as needed and he is not a charity, and no way of knowing what other conditions would be in that contract which hasn’t even been written yet.

      On Friday, SA’s Energy Minister Tom Koutsantonis said the State Government was “up for the discussion”, but said the private sector should put up the cash. Mr Wood agreed.
      “I would hope there’s no suggestion that the Government would put any money into a project, why should they? Why wouldn’t the private sector find a way?” Mr Wood said.”Often we hear that we’ve [companies] got a great solution and all I need is some government subsidy.”

      It sounds like another Ausse millionaire is trying to organise money from some combination of private VC and government, and if they can swing that I say go for it, for a reason I’ll mention in a moment.
      Also much brownie points to Tony Wood at the Grattan Institute for wanting power installation to be capital efficient. But SA’s previous obsession with public debt financing is concerning:

      The SA Government has flagged its own “dramatic” intervention to the power crisis in coming weeks, and has explicitly not ruled out re-nationalising parts of the privatised system.

      Which parts? And what rules would the state-owned parts operate under? Standard AEMO rules I should hope. I wouldn’t be averse to SA owning a battery of Buffering Batteries, for the reason that the batteries are not a primary energy source, they only help to smooth out the power flow over the course of a day. What is concerning is seeing the ABC write confusing statements like this one yetserday:

      The South Australian Government is currently in the market for a new source of electricity to power its own needs.
      The tenders for the 10-year contract specified that 75 per cent of the government’s supply would come from a new market entrant.
      The remaining 25 per cent would come from dispatchable renewable sources.
      Tesla’s offer could tick both boxes.

      But the batteries are not a source of energy! They can’t be considered in the same category as tenders for the supply of energy. You’re not going to be recharging them with wind power if the wind isn’t blowing. All this does is move the brownout problem 8 hours to the right, but Mr Musk gets to make a few hundred mill in the meantime. Such a generous genius! /s

      For the longest time the mantra has been that energy must be produced at the same rate it is demanded because there was no scalable and effective way to store a huge amount of harvested energy in excess of demand and deliver it at power levels required. I still do not believe Powerwall 2 is capital-efficient enough, long-lived enough, or energy-dense enough to actually solve this problem in the medium term (say 10 to 25 years). The sting is in the tail. After he gives them this buffer at mates’ rates, eventually the batteries lose charge capacity and have to be replaced, and that means buying new ones at the rate the old ones fail. It is not so much buying a battery farm as beginning a subscription to a battery replacement service. It’s like a pusher giving cheap drug samples to get buyers hooked.

      Note Musk has said it would solve the “immediate problem”, which is true, and he is trying to exploit this shortage crisis before any better solution arrives. Once the better solution arrives they won’t have to buy new batteries as the old ones fail, they can just let it taper off until the marginal benefit is less than operating cost, then shut it down. Then they face the massive lithium battery disposal problem, the non-green end of the deal they don’t talk about.

      As long as no public money is wasted on this, I don’t have a problem with it, as SA will be no worse off than at present, and it will allow greater use (higher capacity factor) of the wind turbine ‘farms’ that they’ve already sunk a lot of public money into, a benefit that lasts as long as the batteries hold up under continued charge/drain cycles. If their business case is good enough for private finance to fund the majority of Musk’s offer then they should (and probably will) go for it.

      10

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        >> “South Australia has over 1700 MW of wind installed”

        Darn, the numbers are unforgiving. Doing one line of math upfront would have saved a tonne of my wasted words.

        100MWh / (1700MW * 0.3) = 0.2h = 12 minutes.

        The 100MWh would only be enough to store the average SA wind output for 12 minutes, not enough to spread it out over the daily cycle.
        Only under very contrived circumstances would 100MWh make the difference between a total grid-down scenario and a brown-out scenario, as the wind capacity and grid demand of SA are both so huge compared to 100MWh, even assuming the batteries could discharge all that energy in 1 hour.
        ie After a northern pylon topples (or a plant’s inverter gets skittish about lightning, as happened in September) it gives a typical 500MW peaking gas fired plant about 12 minutes warning they would have to take over the loss of the wind connection before the batteries ran out.
        Musk really is offering a token installation that could do almost nothing but the slightest amount of buffering. I guess only AEMO knows if that is still useful to have in a storm.

        00

        • #
          Big Dave

          Andrew,
          to add to your numbers. I believe USD250/kWh was the suggested price. 100MWh = 100,000 * 250 = USD25M ~ AUD34.7M.
          ABS 2006 has ~460,000 households in Adelaide. So around $70 per household.

          That’s a lot to pay for 12 minutes more.

          Saw in the paper the Sarah two dads was in favour of a battery solution. That tells you all you need to know.

          00

  • #

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>