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

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (46 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 9.4 out of 10 based on 46 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/y8nuw3p6

161 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Currently 6.1°C in sunny Ballarat, yes I believe the Gore effect has kicked in.

    90

  • #

    Rather than link in each week to the most recent week’s data for the Australian Base Load totals, I have made a sticky Post, so it’s always at the top at my home site. That Post has an Introduction, and the permanent link to all the weekly data Posts.

    At that Sticky, I have also added some new information, about how many coal fired plants there are in Australia (16, if Loy Yang A and B in Victoria count as two Plants) the total number of Units at those 16 plants, (49 in all) and the SuperCritical Plants. (4 of them, all in Queensland)

    The data for this week shows that the Base Load was still over 18,000MW, with 2 days over 19000MW. It also shows that at the 4AM snapshot in time (absolute minimum power consumption) coal fired power supplied between 78% and 85% of all the Base Load.

    Wind Power varied between 1% and 12.7% of that total.

    Interestingly, at the 4AM time, (most of) those Units at those coal fired plants are operating at a derated amount of power, averaging around 15,500MW, and then they ramp up the power generation during the day, so that, at the evening peak time (6PM) that generation total is around 20,000MW out of a 23,000MW total Nameplate for them all. Of those 49 separate Units at those 16 plants, 44 of them were generating all week, with two Units in Victoria down, and three Units in Queensland down, most probably for scheduled maintenance.

    What is surprising is how few natural gas fired plants are being used, except in South Australia.

    I also checked out the commercial solar power plants and the most they generated was 200MW, and that was for around 1 hour at most around Midday, so that’s around 0.8% of the total generation, but again, that’s barely for one hour.

    The same also applies for Rooftop Solar Power, which reached a maximum of 2000MW, supplied by homes feeding power back to the grid, but again, keep in mind that this is for barely one hour around Midday, so that’s about 8% of the total generation, again for only one hour.

    The link to the Sticky Post with the permanent link is as follows.

    Base Load Electrical Power – Introduction And The Permanent Link To The Data For Australia

    For those of you who just want the data for the week, that link is as follows.

    Australian Base Load Electrical Power – Week Ending 15th July 2017

    Tony.

    231

    • #

      I mentioned last week that I am learning new things as I go through this process of watching and recording this data.

      I have often heard the meme that coal fired power is long past its use by date because it cannot be used as a load following supply of electrical power.

      I would record the data for coal fired power on a State by State basis, and there are only those three States with coal fired power, NSW, Qld, and Vic. With Victoria now having to do without the now closed Hazelwood, their generation from coal fired power is (virtually) a straight line, as those plants deliver all they can into the Victorian grid.

      As I was recording the data for NSW and Queensland, I noticed that most of the generation curves looked (somewhat) similar to the actual load curve for power consumption.

      So, as a further exercise, I recorded the data from just the coal fired power plants on that overall three State basis.

      The resultant of all of that is that the generation load curve for coal fired power is the same shape as for the actual consumption load curve.

      I saved the image to show you, and that is at this link.

      Under the actual graphs is the list of all the fossil fuel plants, Coal fired, gas fired, and kerosene and diesel plants. All the ticked boxes are the coal fired plants only, and that load curve is the lower one of those two you see there. The upper load curve is for all fossil fueled plants, and when you compare these load curves with the master in the Introduction Post, you can see that they are the same shape.

      With those coal fired plants, at that 4AM time, the minimum load of 18,000MW, they are slightly derated in power output (as I mentioned in the text of the Post) and then, as the evening peak approaches, power output is ramped up to supply the bulk of power at that Peak time.

      So, with 16 power plants, and 44 of those 49 separate Units in operation this week, they can generate power on a basis that IS actually load following, as you can see. They just do it on a Unit by Unit basis across the whole of the grids.

      The grid may seem robust, as it is, but it’s also a finely tuned instrument.

      Tony.

      241

      • #

        Where would we be
        without ol’ King Coal?
        Below the base load
        in Blackout Territory.

        120

      • #
        mobilly2

        Tony is there any chance these power stations are gaming the Government`s failed system and running these power stations at shall we say idle only to ramp it up when the windy mills stop turning .
        Just an aside the Northern Territory times reported there are only 1500 of the 7000 Barramundi still alive in the Hazelwood cooling ponds , I expected Ms Hanson/Young , Mr de natali and the like to be wadding through the ponds rescuing the poor fish given their fervor for the lesser known three eyed eight leg duck billed flying frog only found in areas that may want or have mining lease`s

        70

        • #

          Tony is there any chance these power stations are gaming the Government`s failed system and running these power stations at shall we say idle only to ramp it up when the windy mills stop turning.

          No chance that is happening at all.

          As you can see from that image I linked to in comment 2.1, those coal fired plants are running only as required. They deliver what they are told to generate for the specific time that they are needed.

          Tony.

          70

          • #
            Robber

            Tony, as I understand it, every 5 minutes each generator bids for how much they are prepared to supply at what price. Lowest bids get preference, so wind bids low because they also get their $82/MWhr bonus through sale of their renewable certificates over and above the wholesale price. Assumption is that gas provides the highest cost increment so they bid highest and everybody wins. But if coal plants curtail generation, requiring more gas, then prices go higher, and everybody receives the highest price. Gaming? You bet.

            60

    • #
      Robber

      Thanks for the great work Tony. One question:
      At just after 2pm on Sunday, I note on the AEMO site that the NEM Dispatch Overview shows a total generation from wind/other of 2177 MW, while the Anero.id site shows wind total generation of 2750 MW, something that I have noticed before that it reports higher numbers. Why the discrepancy?

      50

      • #

        Robber,

        Aha!

        Let me show you something here, so you get an appreciation of that Aneroid site.

        Go to this link, and then scroll to the bottom. Note how it is updated every five minutes.

        This is the actual AEMO dispatch site for every power plant of every type in Australia, well on that East of the WA border basis for the major Oz grids anyway.

        You’ll either need to do a bit of work here, or take my word for it.

        See the bottom blue link there. Well click on that. It’s a Zip file, so you’ll need to save that file to your Downloads (or wherever) and then go to that zip file, and click on Run. It will open a text box, asking you to open the file in a spread sheet, and I have Excel. Once you open it, that tells you the current power delivery from every power plant.

        It gets updated every five minutes.

        As is stated at that Aneroid site, it is updated on a five minute basis, so he (quite obviously) has a program where it can convert all that data into the rolling graph you see at the site, for all versions of power generation, and it does that every five minutes as the new original is published.

        My guess about the other site is that their program doesn’t do that update on the same five minute basis.

        Just a hunch here, mind you, but that’s the only way I can explain why they are different.

        Tony.

        110

    • #
      Dennis

      So much for value for taxpayer’s monies via subsidies to renewables, so called.

      20

    • #
      James in Melbourne

      Hi Tony,

      Thanks for all the information you put up. Can I request clarification on Australia’s caseload requirement: is it 18,000MW a day, or at any one time? What would it be expressed as a 24-hour figure?

      I also wanted to ask you – or anyone else out there – if people constantly describe fossil fuel plants and mines and deposits as “stranded assets,” because, you know, the price of renewables is dropping like a stone and they are “already cheaper than fossil fuels” – as one constantly sees in headlines – what about the possibility that a wind farm could also, in the economic sense, qualify as a “stranded asset,” if it can’t produce viably against its nameplate?

      Or do the large-scale generation certificates work to ensure that even an unviable windfarm can’t be a stranded asset?

      Thanks,

      JiM

      40

      • #
        Robber

        Jim, 18,000 MW is power generation at a point in time, multiply by 24 to get MWhr as energy consumed per day.
        Re “price of renewables is dropping”, from Dr Alan Finkel’s report the “levelised cost of generation in 2020 is reported as follows:
        Wind $92/MWhr No back up
        Large-scale Solar PV $91/Mwhr No back up
        Large-scale Solar PV with 3 hours back up $138/MWhr
        Solar Thermal with storage $172/Mwhr Includes 12 hours storage at 100%
        Combined Cycle Gas Turbine $83/MWhr
        Supercritical Coal $76/MWhr

        So when you add back up to wind you will end up with a total cost of order $150/MWhr.
        Renewables cheaper than coal or gas? Tell ‘em they’re dreaming.
        But in terms of return on investment, wind and solar generators, as well as receiving the current wholesale price of around $100/MWhr, up from $50/MWhr last year following closure of Hazelwood, also get to sell renewable energy certificates currently about $82/MWhr. So they are laughing all the way to their overseas banks.

        160

        • #
          Dennis

          And, because the price of electricity is based on the highest cost source but most electricity is produced by the lowest cost sources the retail price to consumers is artificially too high.

          One piece of evidence is revealed by electricity provider marketing strategy of offering customers an incentive to sign up with them, a range of pay bills on time discount from what I have seen being 10% to 22%.

          Normal business account settlement discount for 30 days payment from end of a month is 2.5%

          Obviously the operating profit margin on electricity is high enough to offer such large discounts and remain profitable.

          50

        • #

          Note where Robber mentions this:

          Jim, 18,000 MW is power generation at a point in time, multiply by 24 to get MWhr as energy consumed per day.

          Do the sums here.

          It never falls below 18,000MW so that means across a full year, that’s a total power generation of 157.8TWH of power.

          Australia only generates (around) 230TWH of power each year, so straight up, that means the Base Load is ….. 68% of total power generation.

          For the life of me, I cannot figure out why no one, anywhere has even mentioned this, because the minute it comes out, it will be perhaps one of the Monster stories to come out, and the journalist who does get the story out will have his job secured for as long as he wants it.

          I’ll bet there are some who actually might have seen it, and just shaken their heads and said ….. “Well that can’t be right.” so they’ve just ignored it.

          When it does come out, then watch opinion on coal fired power turn around.

          Tony.

          231

      • #

        Jim,

        that 18,000MW is a snapshot at any single point in time across the whole 24 hour period. That is the absolute minimum power required.

        (I’ve always wanted to say this) Here’s one I prepared earlier! (shown at this link)

        This was done around three/four years back, but is still pretty much current.

        This is a Summer Load Curve I coloured in for effect.

        Note the vertical scale and it is an Australian Load Curve here, with the dip, even three years back still at that 18000MW mark.

        All the pink colour you see there is that Base Load and is in the main all of it, coal fired power. The Blue colour is Peaking Power, as consumption rises. That is mainly natural gas fired power, and the remainder of coal fired power as it ramps up during the day. The yellow colour you see along the bottom is wind power, and while it varies across the day, I have expressed it here as an average amount across the whole 24 hour period.

        As to stranded assets, and renewables being cheaper than coal fired power, look at any of the AEMO generation and cost graphs for NSW, Qld, and Victoria. (shown at this link and click on electricity data dashboard) Note at the low point 4AM every day for those three States, just by hovering your mouse over that low point and the cost and consumption show up in their boxes.

        You’ll see that, at that time, power cost is around the cheapest it is for the day, and, umm, if 80%+ of that power being supplied at that time is coal fired power, then I might humbly suggest that coal fired power actually is the cheapest form of power generation.

        That stranded asset meme you read is just a trendy term by whoever thought it up, and it’s caught on.

        Wait until they start shutting them down, and then see just how stranded they really will be. People will scream to turn them back on. Too late then.

        Stranded Asset my ar$e!

        Tony.

        210

        • #
          Dennis

          Stranded by government penalty system, and therefore, according to politicians, the owners make a “commercial decision” to stop operating the power station.

          Boards of Directors do not abandon valuable profit producing assets for no good reason.

          110

        • #
          Will Janoschka

          How much ancient energy (coal) does earth still have in known reserves? How much time we gots to get the nuclear stuff running properly?
          All the best! -will-

          81

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            You hit the critical points there Will.

            We have a lot of useful coal available but need to begin proper research and development into the use of Nuclear technology so that the transition goes well.

            Unfortunately we have politics in the way so it will be a giant shambles occurring at the last minute.

            p.s. The red was meant to be green.

            KK

            10

        • #
          Another Ian

          Tony

          A couple of questions re that data dashboard and “NEM Despatch Overview”.

          1. Is there somewhere which explains the labels, particularly on the arrows?

          2. The arrows between states – what is going on when they go red?

          3. You’ve probably done this somewhere else – is there a list of maximum from each source by state?

          I’m getting the impression that there better not be a major fossil fuel generator go out.

          TIA

          60

          • #

            Another Ian,

            Those arrows indicate the interconnectors between States, but I guess you already knew that. Can’t say I’ve been there long enough to see them go red.

            I would say that Qld is sending power (via both interconnectors) into (Northern) NSW, (Southern) NSW sending power to Vic, (could be snowy hydro) SA sending (via both interconnectors) excess wind, (good right now) into Vic, and Tas Hydro also sending power to Vic as well.

            At my Intro Post (first link above in comment 2) I have a list of every coal fired plant by Nameplate in each State and the totals. (I suppose you meant those coal fired power plants)

            Right now (just after 6PM my time) ancient old Liddell, 46 years old, and unable to make its (new rated) 500MW per Unit but is still delivering 1700MW at Peak, but right now, Unit 2 is going off line, so there goes 425MW, hence all that supply into NSW from you see at NEM Dispatch Overview.

            Thank heavens someone with vision built those new coal fired plants in Queensland.

            Even now, all those 43 (out of 49) Units are almost operating at their max they can deliver.

            Coal fired power is going nowhere soon, because they need all they can get from those plants.

            Tony.

            110

    • #
      mobilly2

      Hi Tony
      Another excellent post
      you mention rooftop solar measured 2000mw
      I know all the theory and I know those mw`s will not go back past the first transformer they encounter , my best analogy is grab a 240v AC power pack that runs household 12v DC appliances phone chargers , clock radios and others , now put a 12v charge on the 12v plug and meter the output from the 240v side and you will never get a output ( I know its a bad analogy as you have the ac/dc difference and no rectifier to convert ) the principal is still the same , can you please explain it in a better way than I can

      50

  • #
    Another Ian

    Not bad for “the hottest year ever”

    “Mid-July, after the 4th, looking for fun… what to do… Ski Squaw!”

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2017/07/16/mid-july-after-the-4th-looking-for-fun-what-to-do-ski-squaw/

    50

  • #
    warcroft

    News.com.au are pulling out all the stops.

    “HUMANS boiled alive and “death smogs” are predicted for Earth.”

    “Mr Wallace-Wells said if global temperatures rose by around 4C, hot and humid equatorial regions would be unliveable. Within a few hours, a human body would be cooked to death from both inside and out.”

    “Even if Australians manage to survive major cities being in “permanent extreme drought” or poisonous sea “burps” it’s likely we’ll be finished off by “rolling death smogs” or “perpetual war” instead, the article states.”

    http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/backlash-against-doomsday-article-that-predicts-a-climate-change-induced-apocalypse/news-story/bf95087d2f7c5f7f9c198f7e59532927

    110

    • #
      Annie

      Oh boy! What next?!

      60

      • #
        OriginalDteve

        You just can’t make this stuff up, its so dumb…..

        They take about evolution, I suspect the warmists warmists have devolved to timid prairie dogs…

        30

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          You just can’t make this stuff up …

          But obviously they are. Anything that occurred prior to their date of birth, is considered ancient history.

          So the very serious smogs that occurred in the UK in the middle of the last century, have no relevance to today, even though people did die in those smogs, which is why the word “smog” implies something evil.

          The truth of the matter is that fogs are common in the UK – because of rivers and lakes and marshes and other wet stuff.

          In the 1950′s (the decades of the smogs) there was a lot of demolition work going on, to get rid of all the bomb sites donated by the Germans in the years previous. Nobody thought to tell the demolition workers not to burn the combustible stuff, so the smoke particulates got mixed up in the fogs, producing smog.

          Once the authorities were on to it, they stopped on-site burning, and they gave out face masks to all the kids, who played on the bomb sites (and rarely found a bomb), and everybody else who had to work in or around the bomb sites, looking for “toys” the kids missed.

          The concept of “smog” as being something dangerous comes from that background, and that is its only meaning.

          The word is used purely as a propaganda strategy to try and link the current mild weather to the devastating effects of the second world war. If that sort of parallel is the best the spin doctors can do, then they are loosing in a bad way.

          Question for authors: How many official “smogs” were notified in the UK, and Western Europe, in the four decades from 1970 to 2010?

          20

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          You see it in The Movies!

          Let’s see if it’s true!

          00

      • #
        Another Ian

        Annie

        You can bet it will be “worser”

        40

    • #

      I wonder how those people survive, who go into saunas where it’s high temperatures and high humidity, and spend hours doing so, with the occasional dip into a hole cut into a frozen river or for a roll in the snow. I used to love doing this.

      60

    • #
      el gordo

      Michael Mann becomes sceptical. Too late hairy legs, its the end of the world and its all my fault.

      60

  • #
    incoherent rambler

    Lord Turnball

    Well, the laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable but the only laws that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.

    110

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Oh Kay!

      You had better search for an Australian statute that permits and condones gravity.

      And if you cannot find one, you will just have to float away, and go somewhere else, that does have such a statute.

      20

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      More a case of: “Render to Caesar…”.

      00

  • #
    Robber

    With the COAG meeting in Hobart of Australian Governments deciding to agree with 49 of 50 recommendations from the Dr Finkel Review into the National Electricity Market,I decided to take a look at those recommendations. The heart of the Review’s task was to find solutions to address the so-called energy trilemma – policies that simultaneously provide a high level of energy security and reliability, universal access to affordable energy services, and reduced emissions.
    The only recommendation not adopted because of the Federal Government was 3.2, with some States suggesting they might go it alone:
    “There is an urgent need for a clear and early decision to implement an Orderly Transition that includes an agreed emissions reduction trajectory, a credible and enduring emissions reduction mechanism and an obligation for generators to provide adequate notice of closure.
    • The Panel recommends that the Australian and State and Territory governments agree to an emissions reduction trajectory for the National Electricity Market.
    • Both a Clean Energy Target and an Emissions Intensity Scheme are credible emissions reduction mechanisms because they minimise costs for consumers, are flexible and adaptable, and satisfy security and reliability criteria. Both mechanisms are shown to deliver better price outcomes than business as usual. With the additional context that a Clean Energy Target can be implemented within an already well understood and functioning framework, and has better price outcomes, the Panel recommends a Clean Energy Target be adopted.
    • To support the orderly transition, the Panel recommends a requirement for all large generators to provide at least three years’ notice prior to closure. The Australian Energy Market Operator should also maintain and publish a register of long-term expected closure dates for large generators”.

    What astounded me was how little focus was given to the need for affordable electricity.
    There are 10 recommendations under the heading of “Rewarding Consumers” but none of them propose any way to bring down electricity prices to more affordable levels. The fact that wholesale electricity prices have doubled in the last 12 months is completely ignored.
    6. Rewarding consumers.
    6.1 ACCC to make recommendations on improving transparency and clarity of electricity retail prices.
    6.2 Health of the NEM report to include impact of changes made in the market on long-term retail contracts.
    6.3 Facilitate improved customer access to, and rights to share, energy use data.
    6.4 Health of the NEM report to include affordability issues and emerging issues.
    6.5 Accelerate work on consumer protections.
    6.6 Improve low income household access to distributed energy resources and energy efficiency programs.
    6.7 Recommend a mechanism on demand response in the wholesale market.
    6.8 Financial modelling of the incentives for investments by distribution network businesses.
    6.9 Review of regulation of individual power systems and microgrids.
    6.10 Accelerate the roll-out of broader energy efficiency measures.

    The bulk of the recommendations under the seven headings of Preparing for Next Summer, Increased Security, A Reliable and Low Emissions Future, More Efficient Gas Markets, Improved System Planning, Rewarding Consumers, and Stronger Governance appear to be recommendations for further reviews, with lots more work for bureaucrats but no actions to reduce electricity prices.

    The report provides a Timeline of Recommendations in summary format:

    0-6 months
    COAG:
    3.2 Agree to implement an orderly transition:
    • NEM emissions reduction trajectory
    • Clean Energy Target (Not agreed)
    • Require all large generators to provide 3 years’ notice of closure.
    5.4 Implement reforms to the Limited Merits Review regime.
    7.2 Form an Energy Security Board.
    7.4 Commence annual public reporting on COAG EC priorities to COAG.
    7.8 Recommendations of the Vertigan Review to expedite the rule-making process be implemented.
    Energy Security Board:
    7.6 Commence an annual ‘Health of the NEM’ report.
    6.2 Health of the NEM report to include impact of changes made in the market on long-term retail contracts.
    6.4 Health of the NEM report to include affordability issues and emerging issues.
    Energy Market Bodies (AEMC, AEMO, AER)
    1.1 Third party review of AEMO’s demand forecasts and preparedness.
    4.1 Require generators to provide information on fuel resource adequacy.
    7.12 AEMO’s Constitution updated to reflect a new skills matrix for directors.
    7.13 Reduce length of cooling off period for Independent Directors.

    6-12 months
    ACCC:
    6.1 ACCC to make recommendations on improving transparency and clarity of electricity retail prices.
    COAG:
    2.6 Consider a data collection framework for distributed energy resources.
    6.5 Accelerate work on consumer protections.
    6.8 Financial modelling of the incentives for investments by distribution network businesses.
    7.1 Agree to a Strategic Energy Plan that is informed by the blueprint.
    7.3 Agree to a new AEMA.
    7.5 Issue new Statements of Expectations to the AER and AEMC.
    7.10 Issue a Statement of Policy Principles to the AEMC.
    7.11 Ensure the AER and ESB are adequately funded.
    Energy Security Board:
    7.9 Optimise rule change process.
    Energy Market Bodies (AEMC, AEMO, AER)
    2.1 Adopt Energy Security Obligations.
    2.3 Investigate rule changes to synchronous generators settings and frequency of the power system.
    2.4 Revise black system restart plans for each NEM region.
    2.5 Review regulatory framework for system security relevant to distributed energy resource participation.
    3.3 Implement a Generator Reliability Obligation.
    3.4 Consider the benefits of a day-ahead market.
    4.2 AEMO given last resort power to enter into agreements with gas-fired generators.
    5.1 Develop an integrated grid plan.
    6.7 Recommend a mechanism on demand response in the wholesale market.
    6.9 Review of regulation of individual power systems and microgrids.

    12 months-3 years
    COAG:
    2.7 Develop regular assessments of the resilience of the NEM.
    2.11 Develop a strategy for extreme weather.
    2.12 Facilitate a national assessment of future workforce requirements for the electricity sector.
    3.1 Develop a whole-of-economy 2050 emissions reduction strategy.
    4.3 Governments adopt evidence based regulatory regimes.
    4.4 Compile information on gas projects in an easily accessible format.
    5.3 Review ways in which AEMO’s role in transmission planning can be enhanced.
    5.5 Review of the Regulatory Investment Test for transmission.
    6.3 Facilitate improved customer access to, and rights to share, energy use data.
    6.6 Improve low income household access to distributed energy resources and energy efficiency programs.
    6.10 Accelerate the roll-out of broader energy efficiency measures.
    7.7 Comprehensive review of the rules in light of changing NEM conditions.
    Energy Security Board:
    2.10 Develop an annual cyber security report.
    7.14 Develop a data strategy for the NEM.
    Energy Market Bodies (AEMC, AEMO, AER)
    2.2 Consider the need for a market based mechanism for fast frequency response.
    2.8 Update regulatory framework and funding to test new technologies.
    2.9 Continual proof-of-concept testing for grid-scale solutions.
    5.2 Identify potential projects that governments could support if market is unable to deliver investment in renewable energy zones.

    100

    • #
      TdeF

      Interesting. Not a mention of the $6Billion Australian consumers are charged for nothing at all, Carbon (fossil fuel) certificates. LGCs and STCs. For any electricity generation from ‘fossil fuels’.

      The closest is “ACCC to make recommendations on improving transparency and clarity of electricity retail prices.”
      Now that would be nice.

      Would it make clear the vast amounts that the public, not the government are paying for subsidies for wind and solar for third parties? We lose the money forever, unlike a tax. Then if we do want to buy electricity from the ‘free’ windtowers and solarpanels, we have to pay again. Worse, we even have to buy their output when we do not want it.

      Would it make clear why we are paying the highest electricity prices in the world, from our own coal and gas? (wind does not count as Tony makes clear)

      Why did our biggest and cheapest power generator have to close while working at peak design output?

      Why was Hazelwood paid 4c a Kwhr when we paid 40c a kwhr? Where did all the money go?

      How is it that the greatest ripoff Carbon Tax in the world does not score a mention?

      Where is the clarity that overseas interest take at least $3Bn out of the country and middle men clean up another $3Bn, including our own State governments like Queensland?

      How is it that Finkel could not see the elephant in the room? All this nonsense about Clean Energy Authority and National Energy markets and pricing. Every family in the country is paying $1000pa for nothing. It is 10% of disposal income for low income families who do not even pay tax. The nonsense of a ‘target’ is just distraction politics. It is a massive carbon tax.

      170

      • #
        TdeF

        I find the fact that most people have no idea how the RET works, even politicians, quite amazing. The whole business of super electricity prices, closing power stations, record spikes, blackouts must come as a complete mystery, a failure of some complex system?

        The Renewable Energy(Electricity) Act 2000 is so cunning. No mention of carbon. No tax involved. It’s purpose was the replacement of the existing adequate and cheap coal powered system by a new system of windmills and solar, without anyone noticing. How was that do be done? By saying nothing.

        So now as the Act rips into our grid making even recycling businesses unviable, people are just puzzled. Angry. They do not even call the Act by any name that people recognize. There is no RET. The ‘target’ is notional and not something enforceable under law. The Carbon Certificates are. You have to buy them or pay $65 a MWhr in fines.

        My surprise is that even Tony Abbott and John Howard talk about how the ‘target’ is too high. The people who brought in this appalling act have no idea. Clearly Labor had no idea or they would never have brought in the Carbon Tax. The Act is doing all the hard lifting, with gas carbon tax at $400 a ton retail.

        Still, no one understands. I do not think a graph will help. Even front page on the Australian does not help. The media are silent and commentators like Alan Kohler say ‘subsidies’ are an embarassment, that ‘renewables’ are cheaper anyway. No wonder Australia missed the GFC.

        You almost have to congratulate the framers of the Act in 1998-1999. It is now achieving its purpose in crippling Australia, without anyone knowing how it is being done. That’s the beauty of hiding it at the wholesale level and not having the government receive the money. It is not even in the budget. Amazing.

        190

        • #

          ‘WRET’- A Wrecking Renewable Energy Tax.

          50

        • #
          Raven

          I find the fact that most people have no idea how the RET works, even politicians, quite amazing.

          Yep . . and if the average voter were to find out how the RET worked there’d be politicians swinging from lamp posts.

          A carbon tax would be political suicide which makes the RET is deceptively deceitful.

          70

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          TdeF. I don’t know just how the RET works. The one thing I do know is that the Greens and ALP subscribe to Marxist theory. Their primary objective is to destroy the capitalist system. To impose a new central control on industry. So I do not experience your difficulty in comprehending the motives behind these policies.

          To subscribe to their political theory it is necessary to be extremely cynical, extremely ignorant, or of below average intelligence, which last is often compounded by dependence on mind altering substances from grog up. Or all three/four.

          What I do understand is that the Abbott government was elected in a landslide to abolish the RET. As part of that we experienced our very own Trump event, in the form of Clive Palmer. But Clive Palmer was no Trump. He became a tool of Al Gore, and I want to know how this came about. So far as I know Al was a late arrival, who saw the opportunity in Clive once PUP was elected.

          I would like to see a Royal Commission into the dealings between Clive Palmer and Al Gore. Al got what he wanted with the closure of Hazelwood. He would have known that Hazelwood was a tipping point. But too few others did.

          00

      • #
        Bodge it an scarpa

        Hi TDeF. Hope you don’t mind me sharing your comment on my FaceBook page after editing and condensing it to suit the average IQ of my 180 so called Facebook ‘friends’ ?
        I assume that they are certificates, but I am not familiar with STCs and LGCs. Could you or anyone else clarify for me please ?

        10

        • #
          TdeF

          Sure. There is a great deal on government web sites about the LGCs and STCs. The one referenced is just one of many. Perhaps the key sentence is “The revenue earned by the power station for the sale of LGCs is additional to that received for the sale of the electricity generated.”

          Also you can check the value of these at many places

          For smaller home generators it is done now with STC, small scale certificates. The cash grant to buyers of home solar comes from generating 15 years of carbon tax in advance. All this money to strangers comes from you in your monthly electricity bills, often doubled by middle men like all taxes. Also you have to pay additional the subsidies in your state taxes for all those businesses which would shut down because of these government taxes. Port Pirie, Alcoa in Portland,… LGCs and STCs are payments from you to windmills companies and private household for the RIGHT to get coal energy which is by far the majority of the energy in this country, as Tony from Oz points out in his posts.

          It is one enormous ripoff. As the Australian newspaper announced front page from IPA research, about $3Bn of this money goes overseas.

          50

    • #
      mobilly2

      Nice work Robber
      seems the bulk or 97% of the recommendations should have not been in place , Our Government is now recommending repealing all the harm they have done .
      As President Trump said , they would do less damage if they were at the beach !

      50

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Yesterday I attended the Brisbane showing of Climate Hustle. There was time at the end for questions in the foyer. I ignored the star of the show and talked to Craig instead, which was interesting.

    Were any other Jonovians in attendance at the New Farm screening?

    In other cities, did you find everybody went home immediately and did not stay around to talk?

    80

    • #
      Rodzki

      Hi Andrew, I was also at the Brisbane screening. I asked the last question in the theatre (about the Mann-Ball court case in Canada). I would have liked to have hung around afterwards, but had promised my wife dinner.

      20

  • #
    TdeF

    Then Nick Greiner..

    “Disunity is death Nick Greiner warns Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull”

    So removing a Prime Minister who won with a landslide victory was good? Backing the plotters is good, including most ministers and most of cabinet?

    Now they are demanding total loyalty from Abbott? Pure hypocrisy.

    We want the one man in politics who called Climate Change “socialism masquerading as environmentalism” and “crap”.
    Climate Change/Global Warming is not science. It never was.

    I have yet to see a single worthwhile piece of real science to support man made Global Warming. Even the idea that mankind has increased CO2 is absurd non science. CO2 measures ocean temperature, nothing more. If mankind cannot change CO2, there is no logic to this scaremongering.

    190

    • #
      Dennis

      Tony Abbott was relentlessly undermined from 2009 when he became Liberal Leader until the Coalition he led defeated Gillard Labor in 2010 forcing them into a minority alliance to remain in government. The undermining did not stop and continued right through to the 2013 election when the Abbott led Coalition decisively defeated Rudd Labor in a landslide victory to form government. Even then the traitors continued to undermine Prime Minister Abbott, and effectively by doing this undermined the Coalition government. No wonder the polls were unfavourable. But despite the polls he led the Coalition to twice defeat Labor governments.

      Malcolm Turnbull complained in the Parliament about Labor dumping their first term elected Prime Minister Rudd saying that Labor was wrong to do that to their leader. But he continued anonymously undermining his own leader.

      To complain about former Prime Minister Abbott speaking openly in public offering constructive criticism and advice is truly pathetic.

      230

      • #
        clive hoskin

        The Liberal party is dead.Since Malcolm (lost my pants)Fraser,they have been following in Labors footsteps.
        “John Howard said the government would set a long-term emissions target in 2008.

        Addressing the Melbourne Press Club at the Hyatt Hotel, Howard also outlined a series of measures costing $627 million over the next five years “that reinforce our commitment to tackling global warming”.

        Howard said: “Being among the first movers on carbon trading in this region will bring new opportunities and we intend to grasp them. The Government will examine how to ensure that Australia becomes a carbon trading hub in the Asia-Pacific region. Of course, an emissions trading scheme is only one part of a comprehensive long-term climate change policy framework. There is no magic green bullet. Low-carbon technologies remain the key to an effective response that minimises the costs of limiting emissions.”

        The Liberals are definitely not”Conservative”anymore.

        80

  • #
    TdeF

    Even the childishly reported news.com.au is agog at record low temperatures across the East Coast of Australia. They even report the extraordinary snowfall in Santiago, Chile. That is like snow in Perth, Adelaide or Sydney. Now wait for the explanations about ‘carbon’, probably in China. Soon we will have Global Cooling as well, part of Climate Change. Plus Climate Variability. Same thing.

    160

  • #
    pat

    why isn’t small business getting organised in Australia?

    13 Jul: CBC: Coalition pressures Manitoba government to say no to carbon taxes
    Groups want Pallister government to release ‘made-in-Manitoba’ carbon scheme
    By Sean Kavanagh
    Premier Brian Pallister should hold a referendum before imposing any carbon taxes and join the Saskatchewan government to battle Ottawa’s plan to reduce carbon emissions, says a coalition of a farm, business and taxpayers’ groups.

    The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation have joined forces with a national group called AxeTheCarbonTax.ca to form the Manitobans Against Carbon Taxes Coalition and fight any carbon reduction scheme that involves taxing commodities such as fuel.
    The groups have mounted an advertising campaign focused on members of the Progressive Conservative government, calling on them to step back from any plan for a carbon tax…

    The coalition also wants the Pallister government to unveil its own “Made-in-Manitoba” carbon reduction plan.
    Pallister has promised a provincial plan for months and while his government has made nothing public, no action on climate change is not an option, said a statement from Sustainable Development Minister Cathy Cox…
    “The choice for Manitoba is either a federal carbon tax, which would be punitive for the province, or a ‘Made-in-Manitoba’ approach to addressing climate change,” Cox said in an email on Thursday.
    “We will propose a plan that takes into account our previous investments in clean energy and provides sensitivity to our economic realities.”…

    Pallister said last month that the province would not release details about what a Manitoba carbon reduction plan might look like before getting a legal opinion…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/carbon-tax-greenhouse-emissions-pallister-1.4203286

    15 Jul: WinnipegFreePress: Nick Martin: Coalition’s anti-carbon tax campaign ‘misguided’: premier
    “This campaign tells Manitobans we should do nothing,” Pallister told reporters Friday. “The campaign launched (Thursday) is misguided.”
    The coalition, which unveiled a campaign Thursday targeting rural Tory MLAs, includes organizations usually among Pallister’s most vocal cheerleaders, such as the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation…
    http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/premier-disagrees-with-coalitions-campaign-against-carbon-tax-434521573.html

    15 Jul: MyToba: Kevin Klein: Groups Join Forces to Fight Carbon Taxes in Manitoba
    The Coalition also wants the Manitoba government to deliver on its campaign promise to hold a referendum on any major tax hikes, which must include carbon taxes…
    “The majority of Manitoba’s small business owners oppose carbon taxes and cannot afford a policy that will increase their costs and make them less competitive with their US neighbours,” said Jonathan Alward, CFIB’s Director of Provincial Affairs for Manitoba…

    “We know from the public’s responses to the province’s ‘Climate and Green Plan Survey’ and public opinion polls that a solid majority of Manitobans oppose a tax on carbon dioxide emissions,” concluded Jim Karahalios, AxeTheCarbonTax.ca. “They don’t want to pay any more taxes.”…

    50

  • #
    pat

    15 Jul: TorontoSunEditorial: Ontarians need alternative to Wynne’s reckless hydro plan
    Slashing the exorbitant pay rates of the most senior hydro executives in Ontario, as Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown promised last week if he wins next year’s election, is a populist and symbolic measure.
    We have nothing against populism — which means addressing the concerns of ordinary people.
    But while we agree salaries and benefits in the electricity sector need to be reined in generally speaking, there aren’t enough hydro executives at the very top to reduce hydro rates, even with long overdue salary restraint.
    In a bid to save the political hide of the Liberals in next year’s election, Premier Kathleen Wynne has announced a 25% average, temporary rebate in hydro rates, starting this summer.
    But it’s all financed with borrowed money that will end up costing us even more.
    Under Wynne’s plan hydro rates, which will also be artificially held to the inflation rate for four years, will inevitably skyrocket, leaving Ontario ratepayers again facing a perfect storm of hydro misery.

    The same one Wynne and her predecessor, Dalton McGuinty, helped to create when they blundered into unreliable, unnecessary and expensive wind and solar power, which had nothing to do with eliminating Ontario’s reliance on coal-fired electricity.
    They did that with nuclear power and natural gas, meaning the billions upon billions of public dollars they have spent on wind and solar power were an unnecessary waste of public money…

    It’s vitally important in the next election that voters have a clear idea of where the parties stand on the electricity file, which impacts everyone in the province financially.
    This as opposed to the last election where Wynne not only said nothing about introducing a cap and trade scheme, but added she had no plans to introduce a carbon tax shortly after the election. (Disingenuous because cap and trade is a carbon tax by another name.)…READ ON
    http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/15/ontarians-need-alternative-to-wynnes-reckless-hydro-plan

    20

  • #
    pat

    first i’ve heard mention of ***this! what’s the bet it will be rejected. Sky News has it too:

    16 Jul: Australian: AAP: Liberal National Party convention votes down Paris climate accord resolution
    ***The party is also due to consider a resolution calling for a royal commission into the role of human-produced carbon dioxide in materially changing the world’s climate…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/paris-climate-accord-in-sights-of-liberal-national-party-convention/news-story/f3923089036e83078c58cafecb522278

    90

    • #
      TdeF

      Does increased CO2 increase world temperature? It would be great is someone questioned the huge underlying premise in all this, that the CO2 change is man made? This is something taken for granted even by many sceptics. It is demonstrably not true.
      Whether tiny invisible CO2 can in turn significantly increase the temperature of the planet is a secondary and perhaps irrelevant question. If CO2 changes are not man made, the whole story falls apart.

      100

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: StuffCoNZ: Stacey Kirk: Benefit raise, tax cuts for poorest and hikes for wealthy in new Greens policy
    Benefit sanctions will be lifted, the poorest taxed less and the richest more, while a Green Party in Government would also seek to raise all benefits by 20 per cent.
    In a bold new policy launch, Greens co-leader Metiria Turei has also revealed she lied to her case workers when she was a solo mum, studying a law degree, while collecting the Domestic Purposes Benefit…

    The $1.4 billion policy would provide a suite of major changes that would effectively dismantle the Government’s welfare reforms introduced in 2012, that placed obligations for beneficiaries to prove they were looking for work, not taking drugs, and showing up for appointments and courses.
    The Greens policy would lift nearly all penalties and obligations for beneficiaries, raise the amount they were receiving and keep the tap running for as long as they needed…
    “Our plan to mend the safety net will ensure that all families in New Zealand can afford to put food on the table, keep a roof over their head and pay their power bill.”…

    Turei’s announcement was met with rapturous applause from party faithful…
    But the policy has garnered praise from the Council of Trade Unions, which said the party had set out a comprehensive strategy to improve the lives of lowest paid working people.
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/94777073/benefit-raise-tax-cuts-for-poorest-and-hikes-for-wealthy-in-news-greens-policy

    10

    • #
      pat

      ***presumably this is by Walter Russell Mead (James Clarke Chace Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College and previously taught American foreign policy at Yale University. He is also the Editor-at-Large of The American Interest magazine, a regular columnist for The Wall Street Journal and a Distinguished Scholar at the Hudson Institute – Wikipedia):

      14 Jul: TheAmericanInterest: by ***WRM: Coasting toward the cliff: Why Aren’t Greens More Worried About the Budget?
      The latest report on the status of our entitlement programs shows that Medicare will run out of money in 2028 and Social Security just six years later—a reminder that our society is gliding majestically towards crisis even as our political system is dominated by scandals and circuses. The Wall Street Journal reports…ETC ETC

      One of the many interesting paradoxes here is the silence of the environmental activists in the face of a massive threat to their agenda. After all, if the United States (and the other developed countries in similar straits) are pressed to come up with the money their seniors depend on, those countries aren’t going to be sending massive cash infusions to the Third World for climate solidarity funds. Nor will they have the money to subsidize green technology and electric cars. Indeed, the flight from fiscal realism that is a cornerstone of today’s left-liberal politics is a greater threat to the green climate agenda than the rightwing climate denialism greens blame for their troubles.

      If they were smarter, greens would be the meanest deficit hawks of all, fighting like rabid wolverines against non-green discretionary spending and unsustainable entitlement programs. Their failure to grasp, much less to oppose, the planet-killing consequences of Democratic Party economic policies is one of the many signs that the climate movement is less skilled at reading the future than it would have us believe.
      https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/07/14/arent-greens-worried-budget/

      my personal theory is the Greens and the rest of the CAGW mob are desperately trying to grab the money before it disappears.

      40

  • #

    Over the last few years those proposing that the world cuts GHG emissions to zero have become evermore shrill in their desperate attempts to convince policy-makers. Last week I charted at three pathways to prevent the 2°C warming barrier being breached. That is to cut global GHG emissions to zero.

    1. Stern Review 2006
    2. IPCC AR5 2014
    3. Post Paris Agreement, assuming full action is implemented from 2030

    https://manicbeancounter.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/2c-warming-by-resticting-cumulative-future-emissions-to-2500.png

    The issue with all of these attempts is that the proposers ignore political geography. I have devised a policy-making law to encapsulate the problem.

    First Law of Climate Mitigation

    To reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, the aggregate reduction in countries that reduce their emissions must be greater than aggregate increase in emissions in all other countries.

    It is a truism that should be obvious to anyone who has knows that the World is divided into 195 countries, all with differing priorities. If the aim is to reduce global GHG emissions this truism must be confronted.

    Time will run out to prevent 2°C warming barrier being breached

    50

    • #

      A recent example of how divorced those pursuing climate mitigation policies are from the real world is Mission2020. Set up three months ago the new organisation’s aim is to persuade the world to reduce global GHG emissions to zero by 2050, with all policies in place by 2020. Lead by Christiana Figueres (former head of the UNFCCC for COP21 Paris) the organisations political aims are laid out in Three years to safeguard our climate, and published in Nature (supposedly a science journal) at the end of June. It was signed by 60 scientists (including Michael Mann and Stefan Ramsdorf) along with former Presidents of Mexico and Ireland.
      Apart from ignoring my First Law of Climate Mitigation, there is another issue both the authors and competent peer-reviewers should have picked upon. The article only mentions CO2 emissions, currently 41 GTCO2 per year. There is no mention of greenhouse gas emissions, currently around 53 GTCO2e per year.
      People are falling over themselves to hear the missionary message. The Youtube launch video 2020: Don’t Be Late has been viewed nearly 11,000 times in just three months. Katy Perry’s latest Swish Swish (Live on the Voice Australia) has only managed 2,129,199 views in three days. I am sure that Parliaments everywhere will be holding emergency sessions to pass the relevant legislation.

      60

      • #
        TdeF

        Christian Fugueres, part of the Costa Rica political family which has dominated the country since infancy and now lives at the UN, has always been clear. It is about ‘wealth distribution’. From everyone else to them. Nothing to do with climate.

        120

        • #

          TdeF,
          I think that Christiana Figueres is breaking out of the small state of Costa Rica (population <5 million) onto a world stage – or at least is trading on her name and pictures with world leaders in 2015.
          I incorrectly stated above

          It was signed by 60 scientists (including Michael Mann and Stefan Ramsdorf) along with former Presidents of Mexico and Ireland.

          This was from a Press Report. I should know by know not to rely on secondary evidence, but to go to the original. The Nature Supplementary Information is a list of the signatories, along with their positions. Most are not practicing scientists, but leaders of think tanks and quite a few businesses that profit from pouring money into renewables and other types of attempts to constrain CO2 emissions. That is, those with a vested interests in terms of their beliefs, or making a profit from climate mitigation, or being paid handsomely for pursuing their beliefs.

          10

  • #
    pat

    FT wants people to read this…not behind a paywall! what a joke. how does FT even publish this rubbish?

    16 Jul: Financial Times: Attracta Mooney: Schroders issues climate change warning
    UK’s largest listed asset manager fears temperatures will rise faster than expected
    Schroders, the UK’s largest-listed asset manager, has issued a stark warning about climae change, cautioning that global temperatures are on course to rise faster than expected, potentially putting trillions of pounds of investors’ cash at risk.
    The fund house, which manages $520bn for investors across the world, said its analysis of the biggest drivers of climae change, suggesed global temperatures are poised to rise by 4 degrees above pre-Industrial Revolution levels.
    This is twice the level agree by global leaders in Paris in 2015…

    Andy Howard, head of sustainable research at Schroders, said investors would not be able to avoid the “force of nature colliding with financial markes in the years and decades ahead,” as governments attempt to control temperature rises.
    “Climate change will be one of the defining themes of he global economy, industries and financial markets in the years and decades ahead,” he said. “Whether it’s through policies to limit how far temperatures rise or through the physical effects of temperatures rising, investors won’t be able to ignore the impact of climae change.”…

    According to Schroders analysis, between 15 and 20 per cent of company cash flows are at risk, on average, because of climate change. “(Global warming) is a real problem, not just a societal one but a financial one,” said Mr. Howard.
    On Monday, Schroders will launch a tool to track climate change progress, based on 12 indicators.

    ***These include coal production, carbon prices, corporate planning, renewable capacity, oil and gas investment, and political ambiton. The investment house said the climate progress dashboard, which will provide a snapshop of likely temperature rises based on the indicators, would help its fund managers to “evaluate the challenges ahead”.

    Schroders is the latest ig investor to voice its concerns about the impact of climate change on returns. Asset managers including BlackRock and Legal & General Investment Management have previously warned that investors should act to protect their portfolios from global warming.

    The fear is that as governments take decisive action to tackle global warming, including introducing measures that could hhurt some businesses, investors could be left nursing large losses.
    Fiona Reynolds, managing director of the Principles for Responsible Investment, the United Nations-backed group, said a growing number of investoirs were concerned about the impact of climate change on investment returns…
    https://www.ft.com/content/ba3bb744-688a-11e7-9a66-93fb352ba1fe

    20

  • #
    manalive

    Someone should point out to Dopy Dan that the Victoria sits on the “equivalent to 25 percent of known world reserves” (Wiki) of lignite (brown coal) enough to provide the state with cheap reliable fuel for power generation for the next 500 years at the current rate of use, that lignite is the largest single fuel used for generation in for instance Germany (~25% for at least a decade for ~80 million consumers) and the German company RWE operates highly efficient lignite power plants and others are planned.

    151

    • #
      TdeF

      Dan is a creature of the Unions. They are still seething over Kennet’s privitization of power stations and the Federal governments privitization of shipyards, telephones, the post office and so much more. First destroy the electricity, then they will bring the country to its knees. In South Australia, no wonder Weatherill talked about building a $350million (government owned) gas power station when there was one sitting idle at Pelican Point because it lost a trivial $15Million last year. Labor unions want to control the power and the telephones and even their internet (government controlled NBN). Control the means of communication and the electrical power and you control the country.

      You might note that Pelican point has quietly started operation again. Same owners as Hazelwood. Weatherill cannot afford blackouts.

      It would be great to see Andrews out. Then we could have our East West Link, which he stopped for no known reason, costing the taxpayers $1.2Bn for absolutely nothing. The Royalties on lignite could go back to what they were and Hazelwood could start again. However it needs the repeal of the Federal Renewable Energy(Electricity) Act 2000 to put the country back together. No one would cry a tear over it, but electricity prices would plummet overnight.

      100

      • #
        Peter C

        Totally correct TdeF.

        If only we had control of this we would restart Hazelwood tomorrow and then throtttle the SA links to our (Victorian) advantage.
        However we are stuffed because we have Daniel Andrews and Lily D’Ambrosio.

        What about “the Federal Renewable Energy(Electricity) Act 2000 ” Can you explain that?

        70

        • #
          TdeF

          Please see 6.1.1. It is called the RET, even if there is no such act. Renewables Energy Target. Really should be Ridiculous Energy Tax except it is not a tax, it is a law forcing us to pay money to third parties for nothing at all. As with any carbon tax, it doubles and doubles though the system until you are paying a real fortune for nothing.

          There was no problem with electricity in South Australia before this Act. Or anywhere else. Everyone was fine. All our problems have been politicians passing crazy regulations and now passing more laws to stop everything. Coal mines, gas, fracking, exploration, nuclear power, dams (essential for hydro), timber harvesting, fishing, high plains grazing, dog racing.

          What happened to governments doing what they were elected to do? Why are local suburban councils adoption resolutions on Palestine and Iran and Armenia and China and nuclear power and religion? Can we please have politicians just doing their jobs, not acting as a church and enforcing their beliefs? Now they even want to change our constitution.

          Soon we will have to resort to government by plebiscite simply as self interested vote hungry politicians cannot be trusted. The worst of it is their slavish devotion to eliminating CO2 from our world. The very essence of life on earth for carbon life forms is now the enemy and they talk about “The Science”. Unbelievable.

          160

        • #
          Bodge it an scarpa

          Tony from Oz mentioned just prior to Hazelwood’s closure that it could not be restarted unless new turbines were installed at prohibitive cost.

          00

        • #
          Robert Rosicka

          TDef , you do have the power in your vote .

          00

          • #
            el gordo

            Its worthless under a dictatorship, which is why I vote informally.

            10

          • #
            Annie

            There need to be enough people of like mind to get a change. In any case, the candidates put up, without our choice, are often useless.

            10

  • #
    RickWill

    An interesting perspective on encouraging intermittent generation, thereby annihilating coal generation, is the creation of a gas generation monopoly.

    It is well recognised that intermittents need 100% fossil back up. Coal does not have the fast response to accomodate the variability of the intermittents so the back-up falls to gas plant. The consequence is that the Australian energy system is now monopolised by a single fuel source – gas.

    The monopoly has given the gas producers huge market power and they are making the most of it.\

    This is an unintended consequence of encouraging intermittents and one that few people have actually realised.

    150

    • #

      I quite agree Rick. I wonder if we can find some evidence of the gas companies gaming the NEM market.

      110

      • #
        RickWill

        There is an ACCC report on east coast gas supply:
        https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/1074_Gas%20enquiry%20report_FA_21April.pdf

        The gas suppliers and pipeline operators are taking advantage of their market power. With the new LNG terminals on the east coast they no longer rely on the domestic market. These terminals have come on stream as coal plants are being retired because they are not viable when intermittents have priority dispatch.

        From the perspective of electricity production, increasing intermittent generation has the unintended consequence of much greater reliance on gas generation. Gas has been used for decades now to provide peaking generation in the NEM. Intermittents have changed the situation where gas is actually providing generation for peaking plus the times when the wind does not blow.

        There is much speculation about the gas producers and pipeline operators price gouging. They are just taking advantage of the situation created by encouraging more intermittents, making coal uneconomic, thus causing coal to close down and making gas the monopoly fuel.

        SA is the perfect example as it is now totally reliant on a single fuel – gas. With Hazelwood gone even the umbilical cord is fed from gas. An argument that it has free fuel is nonsense because there are many periods when wind produces nothing or next to nothing. In those circumstances it only has gas. Their proposed battery will cover 5% of their load for 1 hour. That will not change anything from a gas price perspective.

        70

      • #
        David Maddison

        AGL owns both windmills and gas turbine peaking plants so they get to sell highly profitable and expensive windmill power plus when the wind stops blowing from this fundamentally defective power generation system they get to sell extremely expensive power from gas turbine backup plant.

        It’s an ideal business model.

        No wonder they are so opposed to coal.

        70

    • #
      TdeF

      Consider that gas is also used directly, for many things. Manufacturing, domestic heating and hot water and cooking and more. Electricity and gas are in competition. You can use gas for refrigeration, clothes drying (Laundromats and homes). Any time you need energy, you can use gas. So if the price of electricity is forced up, expect gas prices to follow.

      All energy prices go up at once simply because refugees from high electricity prices are turning to gas. This happened with people fleeing high petrol prices changing to LP gas and diesel, then a fraction of petrol prices. The government woke up to this and jacked up the taxes and now you pay rough on energy content, 10% less for LP and 10% more for diesel. Most of what you pay is government tax.

      So with now with electricity, except the new massive tax is not a tax but a direct subsidy for generally overseas companies to build and own wind farms paid for by you, but you do not own them. Then you are forced to pay them for electricity from your own towers, electricity at a time you do not want, like lunch time solar feed in rates. All prices go up together. That’s how competition works. You do not have to game the system. It’s like rent.

      Miraculously Labor governments are proposing you pay taxes to build new government owned, union controlled power stations and the cycle starts again. All in the name of saving the planet.

      110

  • #
    pat

    google translation:

    16 Jul: Le Journal du Dimanche: Climate: Macron thinks he can bring Trump back to reason
    Even if in the last G20 the head of state had regretted the decision of Donald Trump to withdraw the United States of the Paris Agreement on the climate, Emmanuel Macron intends still to change his opinion his American counterpart. “I never despair of convincing because I think it is a duty given the function that is mine and it is a trait of character. So I confirm that I hope to convince him,” had slipped Emmanuel Macron to the press after the summit.
    “He told me he would try to find a solution in the next few months”…

    Obviously, these complicit moments shared with the American president have borne fruit. “If something happens, it will be wonderful, if nothing happens, it will not be serious,” eventually dropped Donald Trump Thursday from the capital. An early victory for Emmanuel Macron.
    “He understood the meaning of my approach, especially the link between global warming and terrorism. He told me that he would try to find a solution in the coming months,” the head of state said. Sunday in the JDD.

    Nicolas Hulot approves the strategy of Emmanuel Macron
    The Minister of Ecological and Solidarity Transition Nicolas Hulot welcomes the implication of Emmanuel Macron in this struggle with Donald Trump. “I was a little surprised that the president invited him [to July 14].” In a rather primal way, I rather want to dismiss it, but it is much more relevant to put it back in the game, “Said Nicolas Hulot during an interview with Ouest-France this Sunday…
    “I have a feeling of cold anger towards this decision” of the American withdrawal, he deplores on a daily basis. “Once we said that, I share with Emmanuel Macron a reality: if we only discuss with people with whom we agree, things do not progress,” summarized Nicolas Hulot who “Confident” for the continuation of the climate fight.
    http://www.lejdd.fr/international/climat-macron-pense-pouvoir-ramener-trump-a-la-raison-3390311

    just translated the above & decided to check if anyone is reporting it in English. sure enough, first thing I found was ABC, which has picked up this bit in an AP piece, which is surrounded by pieces attacking Trump.

    same time, I switched on Brisbane ABC radio where what seemed to be several young females were discussing how impeachment of Trump was now a possibility; how he has an awkward handshake, whereas Barack Obama preferred a sophisticated fist bump! I kid you not.

    16 Jul: ABC: AP: Donald Trump’s climate change stance may have softened, Emmanuel Macron says after talks
    French President Emmanuel Macron says his glamorous Paris charm offensive on Donald Trump might have changed the US President’s mind about climate change.

    Mr Macron defended his decision to reach out to Mr Trump, saying in an interview on Sunday in the Journal du dimanche newspaper “our countries are friends, so we should be too”…
    Mr Macron said Mr Trump “listened to me” on their main point of contention — the US President’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement — and “said he would try to find a solution in the coming months”.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-16/donald-trump-climate-change-stance-be-softener-after-paris/8713488

    30

    • #
      TdeF

      So the President of France really believes “especially the link between global warming and terrorism“. What link? No link of course between Obama’s US funded “Arab Spring” and the Caliphate, revolution and civil war and the collapse of several countries. No, it is all that pesky +0.5C in a world average over a year. Unbelievable fake science. So the attacks on Western Europe beaten back in Tours and twice at the gates of Vienna were clearly also caused by runaway anthropogenic Global Warming. I do not remember Napoleon explaining his invasion of Egypt on overuse of fossil fuel. Like Hitler he was ultimately beaten by an unexpected and terrible winter in Russia.

      50

  • #
    pat

    Branson has “a feeling”, but that’s not what the headline suggests:

    16 Jul: Guardian: Oliver Milman: Trump regrets ‘bizarre mistake’ of Paris climate pullout, Branson claims
    “I’ve got ***a feeling that the president is regretting what he did. Maybe his children and son in law [adviser Jared Kushner] are saying, ‘Look, I told you so.’ Hopefully there is a positive change of mind.”
    On Sunday, French president Emmanuel Macron said he was hopeful that Trump would reverse his decision, according to the newspaper Dimanche.
    “(Trump) told me that he would try to find a solution in the coming months,” Macron told the paper, referring to meetings the two leaders had this week in Paris. “We spoke in detail about the things that could make him come back to the Paris accord.”…

    “Trump had hundreds of the most influential business leaders in the world speaking to him and he ignored them, so there’s no guarantee that he’ll change his mind,” Branson said.
    “Who knows what goes in there,” he added, pointing to his head. “The Paris decision was a bizarre mistake…

    “You have people in America who believe the world was made 5,000 years ago. There are some strange people out there who have got into heady positions in the American government. You have the strange position of a cabal of people with very influential positions in America making these decisions.”
    Branson admitted that he was unlikely to sway Trump, given his ***previous criticism of the president…

    “Coalmining is not the nicest of jobs,” Branson said, adding that in Britain miners have largely moved into jobs “far more pleasant, far less dangerous and far better for their health.
    “I’d suggest that the government should help coalminers move into alternative jobs, such as clean energy. Clean energy needs hundreds of thousands of people. That would be good for the coalminers, good for America and good for the world.
    “Now is the time to get massive investments into alternative energies. The vast majority of governments in the world are all still going in the right direction and companies in America are stepping into the breach.”…

    Branson was joined in a panel discussion by Andrew Liveris, chief executive of Dow Chemical and part of a group that advises the White House on manufacturing. Liveris said chemicals companies have moved on from “full frontal denial” of climate change and that businesses now grasp the seriousness of global warming.
    “We are leaving governments behind, it’s completely inverted,” he said. “I believe we will find a way back into Paris. That’s not coming from any deep knowledge, but because of the engagement on the issue.”…

    Another of his(Branson’s) companies, Virgin Atlantic, is part of an airline industry responsible for around 5% of global carbon dioxide emissions. He said cleaner fuel and more efficient plane designs were getting “closer step by step”…
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/15/trump-paris-climate-deal-richard-branson

    has there ever been a bigger scam?

    40

  • #
    pat

    Branson has “a feeling”, but that’s not what the headline suggests:

    16 Jul: Guardian: Oliver Milman: Trump regrets ‘bizarre mistake’ of Paris climate pullout, Branson claims
    “I’ve got ***a feeling that the president is regretting what he did. Maybe his children and son in law [adviser Jared Kushner] are saying, ‘Look, I told you so.’ Hopefully there is a positive change of mind.”
    On Sunday, French president Emmanuel Macron said he was hopeful that Trump would reverse his decision, according to the newspaper Dimanche.
    “(Trump) told me that he would try to find a solution in the coming months,” Macron told the paper, referring to meetings the two leaders had this week in Paris. “We spoke in detail about the things that could make him come back to the Paris accord.”…

    “Trump had hundreds of the most influential business leaders in the world speaking to him and he ignored them, so there’s no guarantee that he’ll change his mind,” Branson said.
    “Who knows what goes in there,” he added, pointing to his head. “The Paris decision was a bizarre mistake…

    “You have people in America who believe the world was made 5,000 years ago. There are some strange people out there who have got into heady positions in the American government. You have the strange position of a cabal of people with very influential positions in America making these decisions.”
    Branson admitted that he was unlikely to sway Trump, given his ***previous criticism of the president…

    “Coalmining is not the nicest of jobs,” Branson said, adding that in Britain miners have largely moved into jobs “far more pleasant, far less dangerous and far better for their health.
    “I’d suggest that the government should help coalminers move into alternative jobs, such as clean energy. Clean energy needs hundreds of thousands of people. That would be good for the coalminers, good for America and good for the world.
    “Now is the time to get massive investments into alternative energies. The vast majority of governments in the world are all still going in the right direction and companies in America are stepping into the breach.”…

    Branson was joined in a panel discussion by Andrew Liveris, chief executive of Dow Chemical and part of a group that advises the White House on manufacturing. Liveris said chemicals companies have moved on from “full frontal denial” of climate change and that businesses now grasp the seriousness of global warming.
    “We are leaving governments behind, it’s completely inverted,” he said. “I believe we will find a way back into Paris. That’s not coming from any deep knowledge, but because of the engagement on the issue.”…

    Another of his(Branson’s) companies, Virgin Atlantic, is part of an airline industry responsible for around 5% of global carbon dioxide emissions. He said cleaner fuel and more efficient plane designs were getting “closer step by step”…
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/15/trump-paris-climate-deal-richard-branson

    has there ever been a bigger scam?

    20

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: Toowoomba Chronicle: Benedict Brook: ‘Coldest temperature in years’ as Australia shivers
    NSW and Victoria both had a freezing start to the day dropping to -12C in the mountains. Qantas has been forced to de-ice planes at Melbourne – a task usually only needed in Canberra and Hobart.
    Sunday will still be chilly for Melbourne, Canberra and Hobart…

    South of the Murray, the mercury in Ballarat fell to -2.1C, in Bairnsdale to -3.5C and at Mount Hotham to -7.8C.
    But that’s nothing on NSW and the ACT where residents of Orange woke to a low of -6.3C, and Canberra fell to -7C. But the mountain resort of Perisher knocked it out of the winter ballpark slumping to -12.1C at 3.30am…

    Weather website Higgins Storm Chasing declared that “the coldest temperature in several years for Australia”. Indeed, the last time it got anywhere near that cold was a low of -12.8C on 4 August 2015, again in Perisher. Last year, no where in Australia got below even -12C.
    Although it’s still some way off the coldest ever record July temperature. Set at Charlotte Pass on Mount Kosciusko, on the 20 July 2010, the mercury bottomed out at -19.6C…

    Forecasters had warned it would be a cold weekend across the country’s south east with Sunday the most bitter. The Central West of NSW fell below -6C which was worse than predicted…

    PIC: A Qantas turboprop ready to be de-iced.

    CHILLY IN CHILE
    Spare a though for the citizens of Santiago – it’s unusually chilly in Chile. The capital of a country that contains some of the driest places on earth, the city has had an unexpected blast of snow, delighting locals.
    Airlines at Santiago Airport will no doubt be hurrying to de ice their plans too with Chile’s capital pelted by a rare snowfall…

    Almost 250,000 people were hit by power cuts mostly caused by snow-laden trees falling on cables, reported the BBC.
    One person died trying to clear ice from a power line, Chilean media said.
    Meteorologists say it was the heaviest snowfall in Santiago since 2007 as the city shivers through a cold snap.
    But locals have used the opportunity to hone their snowman skills and tobogganing prowess…
    https://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/coldest-temperature-years-australia-shivers/3200942/

    10

  • #
    pat

    adjustments:

    google result:

    Mercury drops to a chilly -7.2 in Bathurst | Graph
    (Fairfax) Western Advocate-12 hours ago
    Bureau of Meteorology data shows the temperature hit an overnight low of -7.2 degrees at 7.02am – ***just 0.1 degree off the coldest temperature recorded in …

    ***Fairfax has removed the “coldest temperature” bit from the article & now has the incomprehensible “hit an overnight low of -3.6 degrees at 7.02am – with an apparent temperature of -7.2 degrees”:

    16 Jul: (Fairfax) Western Advocate: Mercury drops to a chilly -3.6 in Bathurst: Graph
    BATHURST has shivered through another freezing but the region has woken to a sunny day as the arctic winter rolls on.
    Bureau of Meteorology data shows the temperature ***hit an overnight low of -3.6 degrees at 7.02am – with an apparent temperature of -7.2 degrees.
    The mercury has now dropped below zero on 12 of the 16 mornings in July so far this year…
    http://www.westernadvocate.com.au/story/4792657/mercury-drops-to-a-chilly-36-in-bathurst-graph/

    ABC has replaced “-7C” with “sub-zero” in this article. see the figure in the summary below the linked article where it says:

    Canberra winter survival guide
    ***Whether it is your first winter in Canberra, or you just need a timely reminder as the mercury dips to -7C, here are some tips about how to get by.

    saw the -7C in a google result summary as well. now notice the change:

    16 Jul: ABC: Canberra in winter: A handy survival guide for newcomers
    By Elise Pianegonda
    ***Whether it is your first winter in the city, or you just need a timely reminder as the mercury dips once more to sub-zero temperatures, here are some tips about how to get through the capital’s coldest months…

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with staying in and hoping the cold days pass quickly. And it pays to keep your home as warm, yet as energy efficient, as possible.
    While it may be tempting to pump your heater and pretend its summer, your hip pocket will not thank you come bill time.
    The ACT Government’s Actsmart website recommends keeping your thermostat between 18C-20C in winter, claiming for every 1C you lower the temperature you can save 10 per cent on your heating bill…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-16/canberra-winter-tips-on-how-to-survive-if-you-are-new-to-town/8709690

    20

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: Fox News: Will the sun put the brakes on global warming?
    By Michael Guillen Ph.D
    (Michael Guillen Ph.D., former Science Editor for ABC News, taught physics at Harvard. His novel, “The Null Prophecy,” debuts July 10)
    The sun is like a teenager that cycles through mood swings – from dramatic to chill and back again – roughly every eleven years. But this time it’s different. It now appears the sun is heading for a rare, super-chill period that threatens to add some unexpected drama to today’s climate change discussion…
    Today, the drop in activity is at its steepest in 9,300 years (LINK)…

    Using computer simulations, scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, estimate that “a grand solar minimum in the middle of the 21st century would slow down human-caused global warming and reduce the relative increase of surface temperatures by several tenths of a degree [Celsius, equal to about 0.5 degrees Fahrenheit].” But at the end of the grand minimum, they say, the warming would simply pick up where it left off…

    But the sun’s dramatic quiescence comes with a surprising complication: cosmic rays. They are subatomic particles – mainly protons and helium nuclei – that originate from somewhere deep within our galaxy. Their source is still a mystery…

    New research shows (LINK) that upon striking the atmosphere, cosmic rays produce showers of particles and ions that seed clouds with extraordinary efficiency. The increased cloudiness shades Earth from the sun.

    Recently, a team of Russian scientists compared the cosmic-ray cooling mechanism to two other well-known drivers of climate change – the sun’s inconstant brightness and greenhouse gases. Publishing in the “Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Physics (LINK),” they maintain the cosmic-ray cooling phenomenon will dominate everything else in the coming decades and actually force a period of global cooling…

    It is a radical hypothesis (LINK), to be sure, but even mainstream scientists monitoring the sun’s rapidly flagging behavior agree the growing likelihood of a grand minimum is stirring up a grand maximum of uncertainty and excitement. “We are not quite sure what the consequences of this will be,” says Yvonne Elsworth, a solar physicist at England’s University of Birmingham, “but it’s clear that we are in unusual times.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/07/16/will-sun-put-brakes-on-global-warming.html

    30

  • #
    James Murphy

    I’m embarrassed to belong to the same species as the people found to complain about a proposed gas fired power station. If they are the result of the South Australian education system, then, well, my sincerest apologies – it’s lucky they don’t start making offerings to appease the metallic gods, or refuse to be recorded in case pieces of their soul are taken away by the magic box.

    Mind you, I can somewhat appreciate people not being thrilled with the prospect of having a power station built in close proximity to them, though only for reasons of aesthetics and property values.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-14/alinta-energy-seeking-permit-for-300mw-power-plant/8709748

    40

  • #
    nc

    Could hazelwood be restarted or is quickly being torn down?

    10

    • #
      James

      If the turbines have not been kept rotating via some external method to spin them, then all they are good for now is scrap. Those shafts are heavy, and will have sagged. I also heard that they had drained the fluid from the transformers, ready for scrapping. So reactivating Hazelwood is not an option.

      20

      • #
        David Maddison

        I posted a link down below.

        00

      • #
        Dennis

        Driving from Inverell NSW to Grafton this morning (Monday) I past a large wind farm on the Dividing Range just west of Glen Innes and not one rotor was rotating.

        20

        • #
          Andrew McRae

          When fossil fuelled turbines stop spinning they get scrapped. When wind turbines stop spinning they get subsidised.
          Failure is success.

          10

  • #
  • #
    Another Ian

    “PHRONEMOPHOBIA – fear of thinking”

    Must be a world wide epidemic as yet unreported!

    (Courtesy of Courier Mail quiz)

    40

  • #
  • #
    Ruairi

    The warmists need the past to cool a lot,
    To make the current years seem very hot.

    That clouds cool all below, like trees a glade,
    Puts CO2 as forcing, in the shade.

    Extremes of climate told through every age,
    For ‘inconvenient’ warmists, must cause rage.

    100

  • #
    PeterS

    In the past the “greenies” often talked about tipping points. Well we are rapidly approaching a real. If we don’t start building new low emissions coal fired power stations to keep up with the rest of the world this nation will implode economically and socially. It’s that simple. Who would have thought that building such new power stations to replace our existing old ones will meet our emissions target well ahead of time at a much reduced cost to all of us and at the same time provide lower electricity costs to boost our economy. It’s a win-wine-win situation, unlike to other path we are now taking that will end up being a big lose-lose-lose situation.

    100

  • #
    Another Ian

    Tonyinoz

    3 red arrows on Data Dashboard just now with figures

    NSW

    Vic1 – NSW1

    -255
    -255
    572

    Vic

    T-V-MNSP1

    -210
    -213
    -210

    Tas

    SA

    V-S-MNSP1

    -86
    -54
    -54

    Vic

    00

    • #
      Another Ian

      Tony

      Oops! Formatting didn’t come over.

      The middle figure is the one on the lhs of the dashboard arrow.

      00

    • #

      Another Ian,

      when those interconnectors go red, it means that they have reached their limits, either importing or exporting power to those other States.

      When you go to the site, and see those interconnectors, you’ll see that each one has three numbers, one large (left) and two small. (right)

      You can actually click on the numbers themselves and it tells you about that Interconnector. For those smaller numbers on the right, they show an Import Limit, (upper) and an Export Limit, (Lower, and all are in MW) and the larger number on the left shows what is actually flowing between States, and when it is red, it has reached one limit or the other.

      Tony.

      10

      • #
        Another Ian

        Tony

        Thanks again

        Next question – why are there different limits on what seems the same wire?

        Ian

        10

    • #

      Incidentally, I mentioned that I’m also learning new things as I do this process.

      Wind had a spectacularly good last 24 hours, averaging up and beyond 3000MW, which is a Capacity Factor of almost 67%.

      Even during that time, coal fired power still supplied what it always does during that 4AM snapshot in time, and also the same as for previous occasions at that Peak Power time of 6PM, and throughout the day.

      It seems that they are scheduled to supply what they always do during those 24 hours of each day, and just stick to those amounts of supply.

      All that has changed during that time is that because wind is so good, then they don’t have to run anywhere near as many Natural Gas (NG) Fired plants to top up what is actually needed.

      That tells me that wind power is not actually replacing coal fired power at all, but just meaning they don’t have to use as many backup plants, all of them NG fired.

      Almost to the minute that those NG plants fire up, power costs spike.

      Notice also, that Victoria without Hazelwood, is now sucking power from the three surrounding States on a more regular basis, and when you see that larger Blue box for Victoria, add on the missing 1400MW from Hazelwood, and you’ll see that Victoria would not be in as much stress as it is now, and that power was also a lot cheaper with Hazelwood than it is now.

      Tony.

      50

      • #
        Robber

        Tony, it would be interesting to see if there is a correlation between wind generation and wholesale prices. For example, yesterday the daily price in SA was $94/MWhr, the day before it was $138. For the past week starting on 10/7: $142, 160, 102, 97, 108, 138, 94. And for the next couple of days with presumably lots of wind, forecasts are around $100/MWhr on average. Vic seems to swing in unison with SA, while in NSW and Qld they don’t vary as much. I am thinking that might be due to less dependence on gas (and wind).
        For July to date, Qld and NSW averages are $73 and $87, while SA average is $123 and Vic $124.
        For June, Qld/NSW $76/85, while SA/Vic $109//99 respectively.

        00

  • #
    Another Ian

    “A New Quantum Species”

    “But then, I thought further about the situation. I contemplated the tragic fact that Murphy’s law says that when you take your umbrella it never rains. I pondered the sad truth that if you want it to rain, just wash your car … and somewhere in there, I realized that I’d discovered a new quantum species, which as the discoverer I have named “Murphy Schrödinger’s Cat”. ”

    More at

    https://rosebyanyothernameblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/15/a-new-quantum-species/

    00

  • #
    pat

    MSM is loving this. hope it makes Trump more determined to withdraw:

    I’ve won Trump over on climate change, says Macron
    The Times UK – 1 hr ago

    Macron: My charm may have changed Trump’s mind on climate
    Fox News-2 hours ago

    Macron: My charm offensive may soften Trump’s climate stance
    CNBC-12 hours ago

    40

  • #
    David Maddison

    Sadly it looks like the demolition of Hazelwood and the destruction of the associated coal mine is well underway.

    An utter act of barbarism by luddites.

    Believers in windmills have no idea how big proper power stations are. A couple of factoids from the article below are that the boilers are 50 metres high and there were 780,000 litres of oil in the transformers.

    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-12/hazelwood-power-station-decommissioning-underway/8520924

    70

    • #
      PeterS

      If such destruction continues there is no hope for Australia. It will suffer the worst economic and social crisis in history. There is still hope and time to turn things around but they are fast running out. To be honest if Shorten promises to do it by admitting building new coal fired power stations urgently is the way to go I would vote for him in a heart beat despite his failed border policy. At least it will give us the desperate breathing space to keep this country afloat for at least a while longer. Of course I won’t hold my breath that Shorten will change his tune. One would hope Turnbull would more likley do it but that appears to be an impossible dream as well. I’m afraid our only realistic hope is for a spill to replace Turnbull with someone with the guts to make that promise to build them as a matter of national emergency. They are far more relevant to our national security than building those useless subs.

      50

      • #
        el gordo

        Di Natale, Shorten, Joyce and Talcum are pseudo Marxists and we are under the boot of a dictatorship, while the communists are walking through he front door with barrels of snake oil. Eventually they will abolish the federal government and create a republic under the control of Beijing, with Turncoat the first president.

        Our new masters will build coal fired power stations when required, but in the short term we will become a country of Medieval cottage industries, a quarry and Chinese market garden.

        60

  • #
    pat

    btw Bolt has a thread on Julie Bishop’s insult of President Trump, aided and abetted by ABC. it seems like half the comments on the thread mock Trump’s low approval rating in the FakeNewsWaPo/ABC poll, which has been carried worldwide, of course, with FakeNewsMSM not interested in dissecting it:

    16 Jul: GatewayPundit: Jim Hoft: #FakeNews Up to Dirty Tricks Again – WaPo/ABC Publish BOGUS POLL to Smear President Trump
    We warned in late October 2016 before the 2016 election that the polls from the MSM were bogus.
    We were right.
    Today two major liberal media players – the ultra far left Washington Post and ABC New – got together to smear President Trump…
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/main-stream-media-is-at-it-again-washington-postabc-concoct-bogus-poll-to-smear-president-trump/

    only poll of “likely voters”. whilst the public is sick of the FakeNewsMSM attacks on Trump, one can’t help wondering if his approval rating would be even higher if coverage were fair:

    14 Jul: Rasmussen: Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 43% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance…
    The Wall Street Journal reports today that global investors like many in this country are tuning out the news media’s anti-Trump din and remain bullish about the country’s economic future. We’ll see Americans’ pocketbook reaction when we release the latest Rasmussen Reports Consumer Confidence Index at 10:30.
    Voters continue to be critical of the news coverage Trump is getting and believe most reporters are out to get him…
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jul14

    14 Jul: Rasmussen: Consumer Spending Update: Confidence in Personal Finances Hits Four-Year High
    The Rasmussen Reports Economic Rating Index is up nearly five points from last month to 157.3, just one point shy of March’s highest level of confidence in the economy since 2014. Immediately following the 2016 presidential election, enthusiasm about the economy started to grow and has been on the upswing for six of the last eight months. In President Obama’s final year in office, economic ratings ranged from 112.7 to 122.9. ..

    20

  • #
    pat

    15 Jul: GatewayPundit: Joshua Caplan: MIT Researchers Slam Global Warming Data In New Report: In No Way A “Valid Representation of Reality”
    A new report which analyzed key global warming metrics such as Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST), the NOAA and HADLEY, confirms President Trump was correct in pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement…

    - According to the report, which has been peer reviewed by administrators, scientists and researchers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), and several of America’s leading universities, the data is completely bunk…
    The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.
    Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings. (Full Abstract Report)(LINK)…
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/mit-researchers-slam-global-warming-data-new-report-no-way-valid-representation-reality/

    16 Jul: GatewayPundit: Jim Hoft: Hah-Hah! Trump Approval at 50% or Higher in US Counties That Put Him in White House
    After six months of the most biased and dishonest liberal media attacks in US history President Donald Trump still stands at 50% or higher in the US counties that fueled his win in 2016.
    A recent Harvard study found the liberal media gave Trump the most negative coverage of any president…
    And this poll was published by the highly flawed and biased NBC News!

    ‘President Donald Trump’s job approval rating in the American counties that fueled his 2016 victory stands at 50 percent, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll of these “Trump counties.”’…

    If the liberal media is getting numbers like this it means Trump’s approval must be somewhere around 60% in these pro-Trump counties.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/hah-hah-trump-approval-50-higher-us-counties-put-white-house/

    00

  • #
    pat

    AUDIO: 8mins8secs: 17 Jul: 2GB: Alan Jones Show: interview with Marc Morano
    Alan talks to the producer of the “Climate Hustle” documentary
    http://www.2gb.com/podcast/marc-morano/

    btw Jones made several mentions today about why you can’t expect better from Frydenberg and Turnbull when it comes to CAGW policies. seems the Greens vote in their constituencies is high and, with Labor preferences, is threatening to them.
    I’ve added Julie Bishop’s electorate, where they might not threaten her, but nonetheless, Greens do far better than their national average.

    sad to see these figures really, given the threat the Greens are to the general wellbeing of all Australians.

    Wikipedia: Division of Kooyong (Josh Frydenberg)
    2016 election: Greens: 18.92%

    Wikipedia: Divison of Wentworth (Malcolm Turnbull)
    2016 election: Greens: 14.86%

    Wikipedia: Division of Curtin (Julie Bishop)
    2016 election: Greens 14.20%

    50

  • #
    pat

    17 Jul: CarbonPulse: California cap-and-trade extension bill hanging in the balance as obstacles mount
    A bill to re-authorize California’s cap-and-trade programme beyond 2020 is hanging in the balance, with absent Democrats and obstinate Republicans putting current efforts in peril.

    16 Jul: LA Times: Here’s what to watch for in the vote to extend California’s cap-and-trade program
    By Melanie Mason and Liam Dillon
    Gov. Jerry Brown dusted off his little-used political mailing list on Friday to send an urgent message to his supporters: The time to rally around cap-and-trade is now.
    “THIS ISN’T FOR ME, I’M GOING TO BE DEAD. IT’S FOR YOU AND IT’S DAMN REAL! So I just ask you, take it seriously,” blared the email signed by Brown, along with an all-caps plea for readers to call their legislators…
    It was never going to be easy. Brown is seeking a two-thirds vote to reauthorize the cap-and-trade program until 2030, a threshold that would help guard the program against future legal challenges. Scrounging up a supermajority is always tough — particularly when Democrats approved a politically fraught gas tax just a few months ago…

    But the steeper hurdle is the measure to reauthorize cap and trade, AB 398. To pass with a supermajority, that bill will need 27 votes in the Senate and 54 in the Assembly. Democrats hold those exact numbers in both houses. But in the Assembly, at least one member, Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), will be out all week…
    With Irwin out, that means Democrats are one short of a supermajority in the Assembly. That means cap and trade’s future hinges on at least one Republican vote…

    The proposal has exposed rifts among environmental advocates. Some national organizations, such as the Environmental Defense Fund and NextGen Climate, founded by billionaire activist Tom Steyer, have embraced Brown’s plan. Others, such as the Sierra Club and environmental justice groups focused on battling local pollution, remain staunchly opposed, arguing the package is too friendly to industry concerns…

    Business interests, meanwhile, have largely come together behind the plan. Utilities, clean-technology companies and manufacturers have endorsed the proposal. Oil companies have not taken a public position on the bill, but allies such as the state construction workers union, which has members working in refineries, are vocal backers…
    A key holdout has been the agriculture industry…
    http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-cap-trade-players-20170716-htmlstory.html

    10

  • #
    pat

    pro-CAGW policies, but against the bill:

    16 Jul: LA Daily News Editorial: Brown’s emissions package too big, too rushed
    The package, unveiled only Monday after being assembled behind closed doors, originally was to be voted on Thursday night. The vote was delayed by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, according to their joint statement, to “allow our discussion on long-term housing affordability solutions in California to catch up to the climate effort.” By Monday, major legislation on affordable housing could be tacked onto this package. That kind of sudden governance is not good governance…

    Some allowances are given to businesses at no charge, and companies may also buy them on the open market or from the state. California regulators chose to allocate 50 percent of all allowances to the state itself in order to auction them for revenue.

    The billions of dollars that have been raised have gone into a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and the revenue can be spent by the Legislature ***on virtually anything, because all human activity is responsible to some extent for greenhouse gas emissions. A significant portion of the money has been continuously appropriated for the bullet train. Funds have also been directed to affordable housing and transit projects…

    But the cost of the cap-and-trade program remains a concern. It adds something to the price of electricity, gasoline and diesel fuel, though the governor’s office says ***it doesn’t know how much…

    Now lawmakers are racing to add more sweeteners before a vote on Monday. This rushed process is the wrong way to pass laws that will have significant, long-term effects on Californians. We urge a no vote.
    http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20170716/browns-emissions-package-too-big-too-rushed

    16 Jul: SanJoseMercuryNews: John Cox: Cap and Trade opponent: Climate change gives Democrats an excuse to raise taxes
    (John Cox is a San Diego businessman running for governor of California)
    If you want to understand Assembly Bill 398, the “cap and trade” bill, just follow the money. As with most “juice” bills in the California Legislature, the negotiations go on behind closed doors where special interests decide who will pocket what piece of the new revenue stream.

    Players include large corporations, unions, environmental groups, etc. As the capitol saying goes, “once the money is settled, everything is settled”. And it looks like the money is settled. Unfortunately, all of that money is eventually coming out of consumers’ pockets in the form of higher costs for energy and other goods and services…
    It’s no wonder California is not only one of the highest taxed state in the nation, but also holds the dubious honor of having one of the nation’s highest poverty rate…

    Republican legislators who try to justify their support for cap and trade only demonstrate their irrelevance. As Republicans, our goal is not to cooperate with the Democrat leadership’s war on the middle class but instead to counter it, because our ideas about growth, jobs and family budget issues are better than their ideas.

    Cap-and-trade is a hidden tax that consumers pay in price increases on a whole variety of products. Any legislator that doesn’t get that fact is placing more value on their relationship with special interests than on the people they were elected to represent…
    Higher prices for energy mean fewer jobs. Small businesses ask why they should stay in a high-cost state like California when there are small business-friendly states that would welcome them.

    Every time the liberal elite passes a tax, a fee or a regulation that raises consumer prices, people lose their jobs. Real people. Real jobs lost…
    http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/16/cap-and-trade-opponent-climate-change-gives-democrats-an-excuse-to-raise-taxes/

    00

  • #
    pat

    from “every inch of the earth” to a “pixel” – from the technocracy:

    16 Jul: TechRadar: Jeff Bezos: reusable rockets will let a trillion people colonise the solar system
    Apollo 11 Gala sees Amazon & Blue Origin chief present his vision of space exploration
    by Jamie Carter
    Is Amazon Prime about to go interplanetary? Founder of Amazon.com Jeff Bezos, who also owns his own private spaceship company, Blue Origin, last night outlined his own plans for human domination of the Moon and, eventually, the entire solar system…

    No ‘Plan B’
    However, Bezos rejects the common ‘Plan B’ argument in favor of human exploration; that one day the Earth is going to be destroyed, so we’d better find somewhere else to live.
    “I hate that idea, and I find it very un-motivating,” said Bezos…
    For Bezos, colonising space is a more a simple necessity for continued life on Earth. The compound effect of the incremental increase in energy requirements will mean us having to cover every inch of Earth in solar cells, he said, while the solar system offers virtually unlimited energy resources.

    “We can harvest resources from asteroids, from Near-Earth Objects, and harvest solar energy from a much broader surface area – and continue to do amazing things,” he said. The alternative, he said, was an era of stasis and stagnation on Earth, where we are forced to control population and limit energy usage per capita…

    He also suggested that exploration and colonisation of the solar system would make it possible to support one trillion people.
    “Then we would have 1,000 Einstein’s and 1,000 Mozarts, how cool would that be?” he said…
    http://www.techradar.com/news/jeff-bezos-reusable-rockets-will-let-a-trillion-people-colonising-the-solar-system

    16 Jul: Inverse.com: Here’s Elon Musk’s Plan to Power the USA on Solar Energy
    “The sun is a giant fusion reactor in the sky.”
    By Nick Lucchesi
    Tesla CEO Elon Musk — whose company makes electric cars and has a new solar roof panel division — reminded more than thirty state governors at the National Governors Association meeting this weekend exactly how much real-estate is needed to make sure America can run totally on solar energy…

    “If you wanted to power the entire United States with solar panels, it would take a fairly small corner of Nevada or Texas or Utah; you only need about 100 miles by 100 miles of solar panels to power the entire United States,” Musk said during his keynote conversation on Saturday at the event in Rhode Island. “The batteries you need to store the energy, so you have 24/7 power, is 1 mile by 1 mile. One square-mile.”

    It’s “a little square on the U.S. map, and then there’s a little pixel inside there and that’s the size of the battery park that you need to support that. Real tiny.”…

    MAP OF US MARKED ACCORDINGLY: Solar panels to fulfill US energy demand (with caveats)

    Musk laid out his vision for renewable energy that relies on capturing power from the sun via solar panels — Musk would probably prefer the solar panels are made by Tesla — to fill the enormous demand for energy to in the areas of transportation, electricity, and heating.
    Currently, about ten percent of energy in the USA is renewable…

    Recently, Tesla confirmed it would build a massive solar-powered battery to help power-starved South Australia…

    VIDEO: Watch the full keynote below. The exchange begins at the 1:03:55 mark.
    https://www.inverse.com/article/34239-how-many-solar-panels-to-power-the-usa

    00

    • #
      pat

      footnote: given Bezos considers the “No Plan B” argument to be “un-motivating”, how come his main newspaper, WaPo, is spewing out CAGW doom & gloom daily…and putting out distorted, negative polls and “stories” on the US President, who has a more positive view of humankind?

      p.s. Wikipedia: Bezos was one of the first investors in Google, investing $250,000 in 1998. That $250,000 investment resulted in 3.3 million shares of Google stock worth about $3.1 billion today.

      surprisingly, the usually CAGW-driven news.com.au is carrying the following, which I posted yesterday, comment #23 above:

      17 Jul: news.com.au: Fox News: Will the sun put the brakes on global warming?
      THE sun is heading for a rare, super-chill period and we’re “not quite sure what the consequences of this will be,” scientists say.
      by Michael Guillen Ph. D.
      http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/space/will-the-sun-put-the-brakes-on-global-warming/news-story/e6beef3256dedf111b5dae2d9c3e1b46

      20

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘The worst warming is yet to come, most scientists claim, and not even a grand solar minimum will prevent it.’

        Sir … sir, that’s bollocks.

        30

  • #
    PeterS

    Is there any politician who recognises building new generation coal fired power stations is far more important to our national security than those yet to be built useless subs could ever be?

    60

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: The Maine Wire: Solar is breaking the bank for Maine ratepayers
    By Beth O’Connor
    Representative O’Connor (Republican) represents House District 5 including the towns of Berwick and North Berwick (part).
    Once again, it seems that the debate on the value of harnessing sunshine via innovative lobbying techniques and crafty policy to save the planet is abundant in the halls of Augusta…
    In all honesty, I really wanted to help and deliver solar policy that allowed the industry to grow in Maine on its own merit and real market value, and did not add any new costs to the ratepayers of Maine. I wrote the minority report for LD 1504 which accomplished that, but it never saw the light of day, no pun intended…

    Policy that benefits one individual at the expense of the many, in my book, is legalized plunder, and not the prudent way to create responsible and sustainable energy policy.
    To date, the electric ratepayers of the state of Maine are saddled with the inflated costs of net energy billing (NEB) amounting to about $28 million, and the clear majority will never see a positive rate of return on their forced investment. The new Public Utilities Commission (PUC) rule, contrary to rhetoric being touted by the industries that stand to profit if this rule is diminished, is saving the electric ratepayers at least $300,000, and up to $1.1 million. This, to me, is pointing the needle in the right direction.

    The way LD 1504 is written will cost electric ratepayers a base amount of about $97 million dollars over the next 15 years. The majority of that will go to non-dispatchable and intermittent solar power, which must always have back up sources of fossil fuels, coal, nuclear or natural gas, and will do absolutely nothing in reducing our carbon emissions.

    The way this bill is written is nonsensical, as net energy is defined as the difference between the kWhs delivered to the customer and the kWhs exported by the customer in the same billing cycle…
    There are also high estimates associated with this craftily written bill, a policy being lobbied for heavily by those who will profit handsomely from the law. I often refer to that lobby as the “suits,” or “fourth branch of government”.

    The estimates, not mentioned by the suits, are $153 million depending on the saturation that occurs by creating a false market via government intervention. These estimates do not include the already existing taxpayer subsidy of a 30-plus percent federal tax credit. Solar receives the highest taxpayer funded subsidies, a minimum of 300 percent more than oil or natural gas. It is no wonder Warren Buffet is digging into this gravy train of tax havens…ETC
    http://www.themainewire.com/2017/07/solar-breaking-bank-maine-ratepayers/

    10

  • #
    David Maddison

    Can someone please explain the warmist “logic” that says a crack in an ice shelf = global warming? Obviously, ice shelves can’t keep growing forever and as they spread out they become more unstable and material is shed.

    10

    • #

      maybe a link would help

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        You’re the expert is saying if ice breaks up, then that is because of warming.

        I would be interested in your views on what limits the extent of ice shelves.

        00

        • #

          I don’t understand this comment? I’m not an ice or an ocean current expert, apart perhaps as they pertain to facilitating larval movements or geographic barriers in speciation.

          00

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: AlphaNewsMinnesota: Henry Carras: MN Solar Project Riddled by Debt
    Lawsuits, Debt, and a Project Unfinished
    MINNEAPOLIS- Minnesota’s largest solar energy project, Aurora, owes an estimated $85 million in fees to subcontractors and is embroiled in legal battle.
    The project is projected to produce 100 megawatts, providing energy for about 17,000 homes. The solar farms are located in many of the counties surrounding the Twin Cities. The owner of the Aurora project is Enel Green Power North America, which is an affiliate of Italian energy company, Enel SpA. Enel contracted out to Biosar America, an affiliate of Greek conglomerate Aktor S.A. Another affiliate of Enel SpA, Aurora Distributed Solar, has sued Biosar for not fulfilling its contract on the project. Due to Biosars outstanding debts, a default notice has been given to them by Enel, which relates to safety and environmental concerns surrounding the project.

    As reported by the Star Tribune, Biosar has stated that it can no longer repay its subcontractors…
    The Star Tribune reported that due to the outstanding debts of Enel, there have been over 20 liens filed in Minnesota. As a means to pay out the liens, Enel has proposed a $108 million payment bond…

    According to the Star Tribune, Many of those who have filed the liens feel that Enel has been able to profit from the recent chaos surrounding the project, as they are able to get much of the work done for free while the various legal proceeding take place…READ ON
    http://alphanewsmn.com/mn-solar-project-riddled-debt/

    14 Jul: MinneapolisStarTribune: Mike Hughlett: Lawsuits, unpaid bills cast shadow over large Minnesota solar energy project
    Aurora mired in claims that may total $85 million.
    Scores of subcontractors have filed a blizzard of claims, saying they were not paid for their work on the $290 million project that was completed last month. One of the attorneys involved estimated that at least $85 million is owed.
    The subcontractors, which include several Minnesota firms, have been stiffed as Aurora’s Italy-based owner and its Greek primary contractor duke it out over delays and cost overruns on the project…

    Aurora features solar panel arrays at 16 sites, many on the outskirts of the Twin Cities. Together, the solar sites can produce 100 megawatts of power, enough for about 17,000 homes…

    Aurora is owned by Enel Green Power North America, an arm of Enel SpA, a Rome-based, multinational power company that in 2016 had revenue of $80 billion and net profits of $2.9 billion. As its prime contractor for Aurora, Enel hired Biosar America, an arm of Athens-based conglomerate Aktor S.A…READ ON
    http://www.startribune.com/shadow-over-large-minnesota-solar-project/434372743/

    00

  • #
    pat

    17 Jul: Financial Express India: Third largest wind turbine manufacturer Inox Wind protests insolvency order
    Inox Wind, the third largest wind turbine manufacturer in the country, has appealed against the order to initiate insolvency proceedings in the national company law appellate tribunal (NCLT).
    http://www.financialexpress.com/industry/third-largest-wind-turbine-manufacturer-inox-wind-protests-insolvency-order/765950/

    17 Jul: EconomicTimesIndia: Rachita Prasad: Inox wind challenges National Company Law Tribunal’s order
    MUMBAI: Wind energy solutions provider Inox Wind (IWL) is challenging the National Company Law Tribunal’s Chandigarh bench order on insolvency, claiming it is solvent and in “excellent” financial health.
    ET had exclusively reported on Saturday that NCLT passed an order on July 5, clearing way for the insolvency of the company after an ‘operational creditor’ Jeena and Co moved a petition for the same citing non-payment for services it provided to Inox Wind for clearance of import shipments to Nhawa Sheva, Mumbai.

    Inox Wind’s financials have been under pressure as 2016-17 revenue declined 23% year-on-year to Rs 3,415 crore. Net profit for the year fell 34% to Rs 302 crore in the year. The company’s last declared consolidated debt was around Rs 1,500 crore from 17 banks including HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, IDBI Bank, IndusInd Bank, Axis Bank and State Bank of India. However, the company said it has a net worth of Rs 2,190 crore as of March 31, and its cash balance stands at Rs 749 crore as of date.
    The insolvency commencement date is July 5, while the estimated date for the closure on insolvency resolution process is January 1, 2018. Creditors are required to submit proof of their claims before July 25.
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/energy/power/inox-wind-challenges-national-company-law-tribunals-order/articleshow/59623867.cms

    00

  • #
    NTgeo

    On a recent thread a link was provided for the 2016 Annual Report of the Hepburn Wind Facility. I have examined the financial aspects of this report to see if the wind farm is a good investment. Some background – the facility consists of two wind turbines with a capacity of 4.1 MW. It was commissioned in June 2011 at a total capital cost of $11.2M financed by debt of $3.1M and equity raised from shareholders of $9M.

    In FY2016 income included $437,210 from electricity sales and $734,674 from renewable energy certificate (REC) sales, totalling $1,180,884. The wind facility generated 9873 MW at a capacity factor of 27.5%. In MW terms electricity generated earned $42.7 per MW and the REC earned $74.5 per MW, which together total $117.3 per MW.

    Expenses during FY2016 included operating expenses of $329,604 ($33.4 per MW) and financing (interest) of $55,660 ($5.6 per MW) which total $385264 or $39.0 per MW.

    IN 2011 the 10 year bond rate was 5.5% so if you had invested $9M you would receive $495,000 each year, and as bond rates have fallen since 2011 you would also see a capital gain on the bonds. What have shareholders received from their investment?? Nothing! No dividends have been paid as all of the earnings have been used to either pay down the debt and/or pay the operating expenses. Given that the moneys received from electricity sales roughly cover the operating and financing costs, the profitability of the enterprise is entirely dependent on the sale of REC. It doesn’t look like a good investment given that there has been no return for 5 years and the profitability of the enterprise is almost entirely dependent on the sale of REC.

    20

    • #
      Robber

      Thanks NTgeo. I believe that the Hepburn Springs Co-op also received a $1.7 million grant from the Vic govt. I expect that their income in FY2017 will be much higher because electricity sales will now be returning about $100/MWhr, while RECs continue to be worth about $80/MWhr.
      Some interesting comments in their annual report: By purchasing Hepburn Wind’s RECs through the online shop, customers can take responsibility for their carbon footprint. Offsetting their footprint means that we surrender RECs on the customer’s behalf, allowing them to make a personal contribution to greening the grid. The more RECs that are extinguished through individualised and community-based action, the more new renewable energy projects must be built to meet the Renewable Energy Target.
      Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project in New York made a short film about our wind farm and profiled it in the lead-up to the Paris talks on French TV networks and globally via the web.
      Dr Finkel’s report listed the typical cost of power ex wind farms at $91/MWhr without backup. From the Jacobs report that was an input to Finkel, the long run marginal costs of new investments were calculated using a weighted average cost of capital of 8.8% in real terms.

      10

  • #
    pat

    comment in moderation re: 16 Jul: AlphaNewsMinnesota: Henry Carras: MN Solar Project Riddled by Debt
    Lawsuits, Debt, and a Project Unfinished

    00

  • #
  • #
  • #
    pat

    jo has a new thread, but guess this is best posted here:

    15 Jul: Australian: Henry Ergas: G20: you can’t fool all of the people all of the time
    According to ABC journalist Chris Uhlmann, whose scathing attack on Donald Trump went viral last week, the US President missed the opportunity at the G20 summit to provide the leadership the West needs.
    In reality, it was Uhlmann who missed the opportunity to expose the hypocrisy of Trump’s opponents at the summit and highlight the damage their claptrap does to public confidence in government…

    Rather, the sticking point was Trump’s insistence on inserting a reference in the joint statement to helping other countries “access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently”.
    The Europeans were outraged, with one EU official telling The Wall Street Journal that merely mentioning “these kind of energy sources is not something we like”.
    Of course, abhorring sin is one thing, abstaining from it ­another. Even putting aside natural gas, whose use is skyrocketing, ­humanity’s reliance on coal — yes, that four-letter word — shows no more sign of disappearing than its passion for fornication…

    For example, a new survey by Urgewald, an environmental group based in Berlin, identifies about 1600 coal plants that are planned or under construction in 62 countries, increasing global coal-fired power capacity by 43 per cent.
    The bulk of those plants are in the G20 countries, with China, India and Japan leading the pack. The firms building the plants and supplying their key components are also almost entirely based in the G20 countries, including leading companies such as India’s ­National Thermal Power Corporation (now the largest builder of coal-fired plant worldwide), China’s State Power Investment Corporation, Japan’s Marubeni and Germany’s Siemens…

    The G20 should therefore have seen Trump’s recommendation that developing countries be ­encouraged to design and operate fossil-fuel capacity “more cleanly and efficiently” as obvious common sense…

    In the US, Edelman finds, public trust in government has rebounded since last year’s election and, despite Trump’s mishaps, now exceeds that in any European country other than The Netherlands; as for France, Germany and Australia, public confidence in government has continued to shrivel, reaching levels that are a fifth to a half below those in the US…READ ON
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/g20-you-cant-fool-all-of-the-people-all-of-the-time/news-story/385b2b2a46023d3203af7226d46fa68a

    20

  • #
    David Maddison

    Polychlorinated biphenols are not really as bad as claimed.

    http://blogs.mcgill.ca/oss/2013/08/30/pcbs-are-not-toxic-time-bombs/

    00

  • #
    pat

    here’s a belly laugh, with an Aussie twist!

    12 Jul: Youtube: 7mins55secs: Tucker Carlson And Mark Steyn Laughs At CNN On Their Trump Jr. Russia Hysteria
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmkVEzwe8dw

    00

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    TonyfromOz,
    Thank you again.
    Your references to wholesale electricity prices are say $24.5 to $120 per mWh such as for Victoria year 1999 $66.5to 2017 projected in AEMO tables.
    Our domestic electricity bill from AGL gives a tariff each quarter, supply only (not including service charge, GST or concessions $ rebates, say $0.12 in 2006 to $0.25 per kWh now.
    I am trying to put these together. If a supplier in 2017 can buy wholesale at $0.12 per kWh and sell at $0.25 per kWh, that is a 100% markup. OTOH, there could be all sorts of complications, unknown to me, in going from wholesale to retail.
    It rather annoys me that the supplier has claimed competition sensitivity, no can divulge, when I try to find out. It is also annoying that the Fed Govt has gone close to protecting suppliers from loss. Nice money if you can Gert it, but problems with the old Trade Practices Act of old seem to have been soothed for operators of today.
    ,……..
    Quick one, do you have a rough figure for what we would be paying today if there had been no wind and sun renewables, compared with what it looks like we will actually be billed? I have a multiplier closento 3X in mind, but it is ever so complicated by certificates and subsidies.
    ,………
    AGL has announced 33% off usage charges if you are eligible for this discount, as most would be. That indicates they have too high a normal charge, I think.
    Geoff

    10

    • #
      Robber

      Geoff, one of the recommendations from the Finkel report is for the ACCC to make retail pricing more transparent. The elements as far as I can understand them:
      Wholesale price 10 cents/KWhr (this is the price generators receive)
      Network costs 12 cents/Kwhr (price set by Australian Energy Regulator based on submissions by network operators)
      RET certificates 1.2 cents/Kwhr (this is the 8.2 cents/KWhr received by renewable generators times their 14.2% share)
      Retailer costs 2 cents/KWhr (based on Reserve Bank report that indicated they are about 10% of total cost)

      So that gives a retail price of 25.2 cents/KWhr excluding GST.

      What is puzzling is how retailers can offer 30% discounts. Seems they must have a very high list price.

      It seems to work like this from my last bill in May (with expectation of 20% rise in July)
      Usage charge (excl GST) 26.9 cents/Kwhr
      Less 30% discount (8.1)
      Net usage charge 18.8 cents/Kwhr
      Supply charge 85 cents/day excluding GST
      Assume usage of 10 KWhr/day gives supply charge of 8.5 cents/KWhr
      So all up retail cost to consumer = 27.3 cents/Kwhr exc GST or 30.0 cents/Kwhr including GST.

      If you compare that calculated price of 27.3 with the 25.2 cents I estimated above, that gives the retailer a net profit margin of 2 cents.

      00

    • #
      Geoff Sherrington

      Thanks Robber
      We are thinking similarly, but I am seeking measuresbthat I can quote with confidence, like whether 3X is how much more we are paying in this part renewable era. Cheers. Geoff

      00

  • #
    Hanrahan

    Where does one find the current Weekend Unthreaded?
    In case it just rolls on, look at the power market: The wind is blowing so SA’s market is minus 60c/MWh.
    This is no way to run a railroad!

    00

    • #

      Wind Power Huuuuuge! 3100MW, up from a base of 1100MW at 6PM last night..

      Coal fired power 15,500MW, rolling back from a peak of 19,400MW at that same time 6PM.

      Coal fired power currently equals wind multiplied by 5, down from wind power multiplied by 17.6.

      Hmm!

      Wonder how huge wind power really is.

      Tony.

      00