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

62% of Australians don’t want to pay even $10 a month for renewables

The Money Question trumps

Three quarters of Australians may believe climate change is real (so the ABC keeps telling us) but only 13% of Australians are willing to pay $1 a day or more to save the world. Anyone can tick the box “Don’t pick on me, I believe in *Climate$%@$#Change*”. But if people believed it was a threat they wouldn’t balk at paying $100 a year, which is what 62% of Australians did in the latest Newspoll.

87% of Australians think a dollar a day is too much. But hey, it’s only the planet at stake.

Newspoll, Sept 2017, Amount willing to pay renewable energy, graph.

Most Australians don’t want to pay anything more for renewable power.

The survey is still biased. There was no option to pay “less than zero”. How much are you willing to pay to get rid of renewables?

The sad thing is that most Australian’s don’t realize they’re already paying so much more.

For starters, The Australian calculated that the bill for federal renewable subsidies would be $60 billion by 2030. That’s $2500 per Australian. In a house of four, that’s $10k over 20 years or $200 per year. And that’s only the federal subsidies and schemes, it’s not the state schemes, nor the higher cost of electricity. It doesn’t include the cost of losing your job, or the extra money needed to pay bills to cover the rising electricity costs of Coles, Woolworths, Telstra, and every other company that uses electricity to make or store something you want. Someone has to pay for the blackouts, the lost production, and all the diesel generators ready in the sheds across the nation. Meanwhile the local school pays more for electricity, so you pay more in tax or fees, and so on and on for hospitals, movies, insurance, and anything with aluminium or steel in it, on it, or around it.

The latest Newspoll shows that 45% of Australians understand that renewables make electricity expensive while 24% are confused, and 22% believe that you can store spare electricity in a shoebox under the bed for a rainy day.

The latest Newspoll survey highlights the community divide on energy, with 45 per cent of voters expecting an increase in their bills from the shift to renewables while 22 per cent anticipate a ­decrease and 24 per cent expect no change. In a warning sign to the government, 60 per cent of ­Coalition voters believe renewables will increase their bills. Only 31 per cent of Labor voters and 31 per cent of Greens voters believe the same.

We live in a democracy. Let’s hold a plebescite: “Should Australians try to fix the weather in 2100?”

 A new coal-power station would take seven to eight years to build and could face fierce competition from wind and solar by the time it starts generating, given the steady fall in the cost of ­producing renewable energy.

 The only competition coal faces is in fierce subsidies. Renewables are so uncompetitive the government mandates a “fee” of  9c/kWh for those who don’t buy enough — twice the price that wholesale coal power sells out. Tell me again about fierce competition when there are no subsidies.

h/t Pat

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (85 votes cast)
62% of Australians don't want to pay even $10 a month for renewables, 9.8 out of 10 based on 85 ratings

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

136 comments to 62% of Australians don’t want to pay even $10 a month for renewables

  • #
    giordano bruno

    i doubt the result. i did not realized in Australia there are 12% of morons that wish to pay 300 $ or more per month for absolutely nothing. carbon taxes and renewable energy bills paid in the top net sequestering country almost non populated do not help the top net emitting countries very heavily populated.

    130

    • #
      Rupert Ashford

      Surprise-surprise there are more than 12% who don’t think and just jump on any bandwagon that sounds fashionable and trust the people who tell them the story without thinking. Add to it that a large % get a government allowance to “cover” the cost without realizing that they pay the majority of the allowance themselves through costs that are passed on to the consumer and you get these numbers – we have not experienced the pain associated with the consequences of our stupid decisions yet.

      80

    • #
      toorightmate

      You obviously don’t watch or listen to the ABC.
      I’m surprised the number is as low as 12%. The ABC staff and audience is not insignificant.
      AND YES, they are morons.

      40

  • #
    Mentat

    Imagine how all of these voters will feel about the politicians and journalists and other globalist elites, when they discover very soon, that carbon dioxide has little to do with global warming; the renewables racket is a giant wealth transfer scam away from your average voter; and that our wise and clever governments and media are ‘sagely’ preparing us for the wrong catastrophe – having done no (zero) basic due diligence on the science, economics and finance of global warming or on changing climate and energy policies.

    The current crop of suspect citizens in our parliament and MSM need to understand that this time (of voter and reader enlightenment) is within the current Australian election cycle.

    Mentat

    380

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes but other nations around the world now know that otherwise they wouldn’t be building new coal fired power stations in such large numbers and at break neck speed. It appears Australia is alone on the “renewables only” bandwagon. When will our NSM make that announcement?

      180

      • #
        Dennis

        Ever since PM Rudd did a deal with the private sector broadcasting industry to cut broadcasting licence fees by $250 million a year, around ten years ago, they were bought and paid for to remain on side.

        ABC was also given “incentives”.

        130

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Incentives to provide excess power when needed?

          Wouldnt it just be better to actually as the govt, shoulder its responsibility to maintain a grid that allows for australia to defend it self, if attacked?

          The word “T*****n” comes very much to mid…a neo-Nero fiddling, as Australia burns….

          http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-06/power-prices-may-rise-to-combat-shortages-market-operator-says/8877200

          “It will cost consumers up to $50 million to keep the lights on and fridges running this summer.

          Key points:

          •Government wants to pay businesses to be on standby to contribute power to the system over summer
          •The $50 million cost will be passed on to consumers
          •The PM indicated he wanted to sell Liddell power station, but AGL says it has no commitment to sell the station or extend its working life

          The energy market operator has warned of an “increasing and unacceptable risk” of power shortages.

          To counter that and try to avoid blackouts, it wants to pay businesses with diesel generators — as well as gas power plants with spare capacity — to be on standby to pump extra power into the system when it’s struggling.

          That might also mean paying big energy users like factories to avoid using power at peak times.

          That would cost up to $50 million, which Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg said would be passed on to consumers.

          “Well, $50 million spread across the Australian consumer base is not a lot of money in the scheme of things,” he said.

          “And in return, you are going to get sufficient capacity to helpfully avoid any disruptions to energy supply. So this is the reality that we find ourselves in.”

          50

          • #
            Ted O'Brien.

            There is a reason why large scale coal fired steam turbines have been used historically for power generation. They are the most efficient, least cost system for power generation. So much so that it was far cheaper to build hundreds of kilometres of transmission lines than to use near site diesel generators.

            That hasn’t changed. Talk of drawing on small scale diesel for supplementary supply is almost as fanciful as the feeding of small scale solar into the grid. The cost will be horrendous, and the supply unreliable!

            40

    • #
      Geoff

      The power is going off this summer. Everyone knows it, no-one wants to be responsible. The grid is now unreliable. Switch in yet more wind farms and the grid will become an expensive joke. Gas was never going to save us. Simplest thing is to cut SA loose from the grid and tell them to go to electrical hell.

      351

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        There is a fundamental issue – there is no problem regards the climate, so why should you pay anything anyway?

        Its a bit like around where I work – there was free on street parking for a long time, then the “govt” decided to make it expensive, so we went from free to multiple 100s of dolalrs per month to park. People were excited when they could shave $50/month off their parking costs…..but I said, “is it just me, or going from free to 100s of dollars and considering it a good deal, seriously messed up?” Peopel agreed it was messed up but people can normalize horrif stuff – look at WW2 and concentration camps…

        I think the climate nonsense has a couple of chinks in its armour – namely we discuss stuff here based on technical merit and knowledge, but most people are iphone ( not android ) users – they want the interface thats easy to use, but not interested in the tech behind it. Likewise, most people only see a big power bill, they dont see the nuances of the science and horrific political & religious game being played.

        As such, the PUBLIC are predominately IGNORANT, do not have the CAPABILITY to understand the science – most people dont get science anyway…..when G***box is a high rating show, you are in trouble.

        As such, any message we tell the public has to be based on the fact that CAGW is a LIE, and the power problems is the GOVT trying to force this LIE on everyone by forcing people into an artificial crisis that doesnt need to exist – and will mean even higher power bills in the future.

        Believe me – most people are struggling financially these days, the spectre of EVEN HIGHER power & gas bills and how it will kill off a lot of businesses ( and jobs ), need to be laid at the feet of VictoriaStan glorious leader….

        Lets put the blame where it needs to be, so the public know where to focus their anger……

        260

        • #
          clive hoskin

          No Steve,while”Dan the CFMEU man”is partially to blame for Victoriastans woes,the BLAME mostly lays with the”Public Serpents”who advise the Politicians,who are hell bent on seeing”We the People”turned into surfs,under the UN.

          10

          • #
            Ted O'Brien.

            Clive, the problem is in our education system. That is where both your serpents and your pollies got their expertise, and only some of us can see through it.

            10

    • #
      toorightmate

      WRONG!!!!
      CO2 has nothing, whatsoever, to do with climate.

      81

  • #
    ROM

    The Australian calculated that the bill for federal renewable subsidies would be $60 billion by 2030

    In a house of four, thats $10K over —20— 13 years or -$200- $800 per year. [ ie $200 per year per person. ]

    [ROM - always appreciate the proof reading, but I think I got the "four" people covered in going from $2500 --> $10k. - Jo]

    140

    • #
      PeterS

      As usual double or more those figures as such estimates always fall short of reality by the time comes. In any case if we continue on the current path that will be the least of our worries. If we continue on our current path our national debt will be in the several trillions by then, and if we are not bankrupt by then we certainly will be soon afterwards.

      130

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        The electricity bills are coming out. Reaction won’t be favourable, esp. in SA. My sister got a bill for double the one for the same period last year, and was away for 4 weeks during that time.
        An extra $200 a month, oh! the joys of an all electric home.
        Mine hasn’t arrived yet but I am not looking forward to it at all.

        80

    • #
      Tom R Hammer

      Most Australians don’t read The Australian and can’t fathom how renewable electricity generation which is supposed to generate electricity “free from the wind/sun” can possibly add to the cost of electricity. They are happy in the belief that privatization of the electricity generators is the reason for the high prices. Ignorance is bliss.

      140

    • #
      toorightmate

      The Australian is probably our best newspaper, but they don’t have anyone with expertise in Arithmetic, nor Logic.

      30

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      60 billion by 2030? I don’t believe it!

      It will do well if it’s less than 60 billion by 2020!

      00

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    Sadly, it appears as if far too many people believe that if someone else is paying for it, it is free. There are almost always the hidden strings attached that makes it far more costly than if you paid for it yourself.

    It is Especially so when it comes to government subsidies. Everyone pays either directly in visible taxes or in the increase of everything you purchase. There is also the hidden cost is all the things you could have purchased but can’t because of the increased cost of what you did purchase is beyond your ability to pay.

    It gets still worse. There is the invisible cost of things not invented, produced, and brought to market because of the increased cost of the materials and services prices the goods and services necessary to make them.

    The bottom line free is never really free. Someone and eventually everyone pays for them. Either directly, indirectly, or by needing them and their not being available to purchase because it costs too much to make and sell them.

    200

    • #

      Remember the extra charge that airlines were offering to abate green house gases? There weren’t many that were prepared to pay any extra. I wonder why?

      120

      • #
        originalsteve

        I recall airlines used to hit travellers with a fuel surcharge due to ( ahem ) spot jumps in fuel prices.

        But as I understood it, airlines pre-buy their fuel at a set price – if so, the surcharge is not needed and may just be opportunistic inflation of profits….hmmm….like electricity price increases with CAGW…

        80

  • #
    Ruairi

    The daft Greens think that it’s doable,
    To ‘save’ the world by renewable,
    Then to squeeze our last shilling,
    Through high charges and billing,
    Just means we are duped and screwable.

    330

  • #
    manalive

    Blackouts are forecast for this summer as reported in today’s OZ.
    Some people have been predicting that outcome and worse for years but have been ignored or vilified.
    IMO it has to happen before anything is done about energy policy and then there will be a mad scrabble for who to blame, all one can do is sit back and enjoy the fun IMO.

    250

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Just saw Ross Greenwood on 9′s Today Show do a great short piece on that story pointing out the folly of investing in renewables and the flow on cost to every Australian, I’m home sick and almost passed out from shock, again.

      160

    • #
      PeterS

      I can already sense a politician saying “these are the power blackouts we had to have”.

      180

    • #
      James Murphy

      This can’t be right, renewable energy is the future, and there are no problems. South Australia has the highest electricity costs anywhere, and more wind turbines than you can poke a stick at.

      Heck, I’m so proud to be a South Australian when I learned that SA could have powered itself entirely with wind for 1 entire day over the course of 1 year. It’s well worth the expense, just think of the children!

      South Australian Renewable Energy Report (link to the latest AEMO report and data about half way down the page)

      Yes, it’s sarcasm (except for the report – that’s worth a read, unlike my comments)

      120

  • #

    There are ideas, new or unevolved, for new tech to extend or even replace our splendid resources in coal, gas and uranium. And those new ideas are being strangulated by tired ideas and limited, unoriginal tech like wind, solar and – god help us – Big Battery.

    The enemy of the new is not the old and tried. The old and tried serve till the new comes along.

    The enemy of the new is the faux new. Looking at you, Green Blob. We have blown our innovation budget on your antique scrap. Trillions gone on half-rotten mutton dressed as lamb.

    160

  • #

    Someone is trying to frighten us.
    Just heard on 2GB Macquarie News a voice in a grave tone that we are due for blackouts this summer and we will have to use dirty diesel generators to get by. The only answer is more renewable clean power.
    If this is what MSM thinks needs promulgating then we need to retrain as coopers and basket weavers.
    Maybe not coopers as the beer needs cans and bottles and has to be chilled.
    Last night we in Sydney were hit by gales.
    That means no solar panels. Potentially the wind power would need to be switched off to protect the mills.So little and unreliable ‘renewables’.
    We need reliable base load at a cheap price.
    The way of resolving much of this is to use smart meters to charge customers the real price of renewables, and have those who want to save the planet pay for the hypotheses.
    A two tier marketing system where skeptics using base load pay a moderate fee only.
    Now that’s an innovative idea.
    The economic consequences would be broad where people would be less likely to go into energy poverty,
    producing more goods and services to feed their families and educate them.
    All we need is the leadership to take us out of the renewable wilderness to the broad and sunlit uplands of cheap power security, like most of the rest of the world.

    140

    • #
      PeterS

      Someone better tell the MSM here the reason why other nations are building new coal fired power stations at break neck speed and in huge quantities is they have finally realised renewables alone is not only not the answer but it’s a given that total reliance on renewables spells a catastrophic end to any nation. It appears the rush to renewables and renewable alone has been put on hold everywhere, except here in Australia. Are we willing to go it alone and destroy our nation in the process? Our leaders appear to be.

      110

      • #
        sophocles

        It appears the rush to renewables and renewable alone has been put on hold everywhere, except here in Australia.

        And Germany. Germany is trying to change course right now as the wheels (or fans or propellers or whatevers) are falling off.

        130

      • #
        Ross Stacey

        From Turnbulls recent comments it appears he is starting to get the message. Great reply from AGL.

        30

      • #
        Ross Stacey

        From Turnbulls recent comments it appears he is starting to get the message. Great reply from AGL.( sarc)

        00

  • #

    that’s the dif between western civ and the stuff out of Russia//China/N.K.–we don’t wanna vs. eating grass
    see http://balance10.blogspot.com/2017/09/they-will-eat-grass-but-will-not-stop.html

    20

  • #
    Mark M

    The right honourable Matt Canavan:

    “AGL are “the biggest hypocrite walking around Australia” over its plans to abandon coal.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-06/agl-called-hypocrites-over-plans-to-abandon-coal/8876096

    No. That title belongs to all you, our politicians.

    140

    • #
      el gordo

      The future is clear, if Beijing won’t buy Liddell then the federal government will.

      ‘Senator Canavan said people would be “lining up” to buy the power station.

      “If Andy Vesey wants to ease his moral guilt about producing coal, he’s welcomed to sell coal-fired power stations at book value — indeed I was talking to some investors tonight who would happily buy his whole coal-fired power fleet at book value,” he argued.

      ‘Mr Turnbull said he would prefer Liddell remained owned by the private sector, but the ABC understands the Government’s options could include a multi-million-dollar taxpayer subsidy to update Liddell’s boilers and software.’

      100

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Beijing might just be shopping for the best deal, got this titbit over on Catallaxy Files from a commentors father just received a package from the closing of Hazelwood Power Station,

        “Loy Yang B looks set to be sold to a Chinese state owmed company, who are looking also at buying the land next door to build a new power station. With prices at $120/MW, anyone company should be interested in buying it – but the Chinese have realised that the West will not touch it and will cash in.

        The LPG tanks at Hazelwood were sold to Victorian manufacturers who have converted their factories to accept LPG instead of natural gas because it is cheaper.”

        So on top of self induced economic crippling we now place the security of our sovereignty on the block because elected & unelected officials are too spineless and self serving to say no to this insidious green ideology that serves no purpose but to weaken any nation that embraces it, it really is the chlamydia of economic legislation.

        240

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘The winning bidder for Loy Yang B may need to turn to the offshore U.S. term loan B market for financing, banking sources told Thomson Reuters publication Basis Point, as commercial banks are wary of providing loans to the coal sector.’

          Reuter

          The China infrastructure bank could organise something.

          50

        • #
          el gordo

          Of course the China Huadian Corporation would be keen to get their hands on it, for commercial and strategic reasons, but because of our inherent fear of communism that is unlikely to happen.

          Nobody would object if the Canadian Pension Fund bought Loy Yang B at book price.

          40

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘….we now place the security of our sovereignty on the block….’

          Not necessarily, its purely a commercial consideration and in line with their long term ambitions.

          There is a rumour going about that the Canadian pensioners own half of London and now they are taking over Australia. Desalination plants are good to go, but land is better.

          https://www.austrade.gov.au/international/invest/investor-updates/2017/canadian-pension-fund-continues-to-invest-in-australian-cattle-stations

          50

        • #
          Ross

          These Chinese power companies are huge.To put it perspective

          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-29/one-chinese-coal-power-giant-employs-4x-more-people-entire-us-coal-industry

          So buying an Aussie power station would costing pocket change to them

          70

          • #
            Yonniestone

            Yes but at what cost to us, every little bit of land, resources, business and power generation allowed to slip into foreign powers sets us up for a big fall when our economy flatlines, think about what’s needed to sustain an ability to defend the citizens against the removal of property rights, police, military and political strength.

            With politics gone and PC culture encroaching on the others it does look fairly grim.

            50

            • #
              OriginalSteve

              Well the Federal Parliament House in Canberra has been through a lot of physical security hardening in the last 5 years.

              Makes you wonder they knew this was coming…..

              40

            • #
              el gordo

              ‘….business and power generation allowed to slip into foreign powers sets us up for a big fall when our economy flatlines ….’

              The Reserve Bank reckons we are already there and in a free world market there is nought we can do about it.

              ‘…an ability to defend the citizens against the removal of property rights, police, military and political strength.’

              They should all remain intact and the new arrivals will also enthusiastically embrace our form of democracy.

              If you want a regular and cheap power supply, then we may need to rethink our attitude to the red menace.

              20

              • #
                Yonniestone

                Never fear our stocks of candles, flowers & teddy bears are plentiful and waiting to be unleashed upon unsuspecting invaders!

                20

          • #
            toorightmate

            The Chinese are remarkable.
            They maintain a poker face when undertaking these purchases.
            Just imaging trying to keep a poker face at a performance by Spike Milligan.

            20

  • #
    Climate Heretic

    When you have this:

    AGL wants to close all its coal-fired power station by 2050, starting with Liddell in the NSW Hunter Valley. Daily Mail

    Prices will go up and up. My thoughts on the matter (But hey what do I know)
    .

    1) Power supply is a national security issue
    2) Power line distribution should not be owned by private enterprise period
    3) All subsides for power supply (especially wind and solar) should be removed
    4) Me I’m in two minds in regards to whether power supply should be privatised. Nah, government should build several HELE coal fired power stations to maintain a power supply safety factor. Stuff enterprise ownership. Why? See Number 1 above.
    5) If electricity is cheap, manufacturing and businesses will come.

    .
    Regards
    Climate Heretic

    180

    • #
      PeterS

      Why does AGL hate coal so much while the rest of the world is building over a thousand new coal fired power stations? Is it possible AGL is sending a message to the government that our reliance on RET and other schemes is making coal fired power stations, both old and new financially unattractive? If so how come the rest of the world is building them? Is that because the only nation on this planet that is so much against coal is Australia? If so to what end?

      90

      • #
        Dennis

        AGL are no different to other public companies, their task is obtaining the best possible return on their shareholder’s investments.

        Because of RET madness and related taxpayer funded subsidies for wind and solar the best return is from them.

        110

      • #
        Kneel

        “Why does AGL hate coal so much…”

        The “G” stands for “Gas”. If coal is the devil, and renewables can’t cut it, we’ll use gas. AGL will make more because they can sell the fuel to the power station and then then electricity to the retail market. Therefore, for AGL, gas generation is significantly more profitable. As a bonus, they only need to “support” renewables to be seen as “green”, then “come to the rescue” with “low emissions” gas power stations.

        Why WOULDN’T AGL hate coal?

        110

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Yes but the ultimate zero sum game is that AGL dies as it has no energy to sell any more….

          Its financial suicide for any energy company to go along with this as they will all die off. No one will be able to afford the power as there will be no employment.

          Maybe they could start a new company “Don Quixote Power Company” and go off tilting at windmills…..

          Don Quixote by all measures, was quite mad…..

          20

        • #
          toorightmate

          The “L” stands for light.
          So we are about to re enter the Australian Gas Light era.

          20

      • #
        RickWill

        The existing electricity providers stand to grow exponentially as more wind and solar is introduced. The RET locks in massive transfer payments from the consumers to the suppliers.

        It is impossible to actually get to 100% wind and solar energy globally with current technology because society will collapse before that is reached. However in that process the electrical supply sector will command near all global resources. Consider how much SA is throwing at renewable energy and all the gas generation needed to make it reliable. The consumer has to pay for all of that and the suppliers are making the money.

        In FY 6/7 AGL had a revenue of AUD3.7bn. In one decade AGL’s revenue has grown to AUD12.6bn. By 2030 AGLs revenue could easily exceed AUD50bn as more resources are thrown at the illusory renewables and their customers are forced by government mandated market distortions to pay up. Unrenewable renewables are a windfall for companies involved in the electric power supply chain. No wonder AGL is constantly airing feel good ads to help justify their command over peoples living expenses.

        120

        • #
          Peter C

          Thanks Rick.

          It seemed quite bizarre to me that AGL wanted to run ads saying they wanted to ghet out of coal. I thought; “what were they thinking”,
          Now I know.

          00

  • #
    Frank

    More alternative facts.
    Again the myth of renewables subsidies being greater than those for the fossils.
    [Just saying it doesn't make it a truth Frank. Get us the evidence otherwise it is you supplying the non-facts.]ED

    224

    • #

      And the usual Frank fantasy backed up by nothing.

      241

      • #
        Frank

        Jo,
        You can’t be this cherry picking lazy, look up the studies done by the OECD, the IEA, the Overseas Development Institute, even Forbes shows the disparity.
        Clearly, the facts don’t matter anymore

        13

    • #

      Subsidies for electricity, 2013/14, including Renewable Energy Target,
      per MWh,Solar, $412, Wind $42m Coal less than 1 dollar, $0.86. Government
      mandates and subsidies hide the true cost of intermittent, inefficient, renewable energy.

      http://www.minerals.org.au/news/the_high_cost_of_renewable_energy_subsidies

      140

      • #
        RickWill

        The minerals council will soon get pulled into line by its smarter members. Renewable energy is building to be the next BIG thing for mining and energy businesses. In terms of revenue growth it will outweigh the Chinese boom of the naughties.

        Fundamentally all global output will need to be directed toward the materials needed to produce 100% renewable energy. The mining and energy businesses that embrace are growing exponentially on their consumer subsidised gravy train. If you are not employed somewhere in the power supply chain you will not be employed. All human effort and economic output will go toward maintaining the power supply system.

        Technically the world is a long way from having a sustainable electricity supply that is based on wind and solar.

        30

      • #
        toorightmate

        Who gets this magical coal subsidy?
        It sure as sh*t ain’t the coal mining companies and it sure as sh*t ain’t the power generators.

        30

    • #
      AndyG55

      I’m guessing that you mean the MYTH of fossil fuels getting ANY subsidies at all, Frank.!

      They DON’T.

      They actually provide huge amounts of income to Australia…

      …. something wind and solar can NEVER DO.

      Wind and solar are a MONEY SINK, that will not survive once a zero-subsidy, level feed-in playing field is established.

      101

    • #
      David Maddison

      When Lefties talk about fossil “subsidies” they are really talking about legitimate tax deductions that all companies have such as deductions for interest, depreciation, running costs etc.. They also mention diesel as well. Diesel used by farmers and miners doesn’t have the tax component normally allocated to roads – because their vehicles are not used on roads.

      These are all normal tax matters with no special treatment for fossil producers.

      71

  • #
    PeterS

    Interesting how the high cost of electricity and the realisation we need to start building new coal fired power stations very soon is sometimes mentioned in the news of late. At the same time Turnbull is heading for a landslide defeat at the next election allowing Shorten and his part to form government and increase our reliance on renewables while more coal fired power stations are being shut down. This will be a perfect storm for Australia, one that can be avoided very easily if we had a new leader of the LNP who cared for the nation and convinced the people to change direction and dump such anti-coal schemes as the RET. Perhaps it would be better if we had the perfect storm to wake up Australia to the fact a socialist party like the ALP and a sort of new socialist democratic party like the LNP both spell disaster for the nation. We desperately need at least one new major party with the proper policies to avoid hitting a crisis point in the near future. Unfortunately, I don’t expect it will happen until after the perfect storm. Meanwhile other nations are racing ahead to build their new coal fired power stations at such a speed one would have thought the anti-coal campaign is a myth everywhere, except here in Australia. Are we that stupid? I’m afraid the answer is yes given we are allowing the vocal minority to take over this nation in this area and others too. Both parties are locked into some kind of death spell for this nation driven by the small group of lunatics in our society and the MSM. It shows the quality of our leaders are well below average levels because they are afraid to stand up to those economic and social vandals. Who needs North Korean threats to endanger Australia when we have our own leaders who are just as capable of destroying the nation albeit in a different but just as effective way. Too often we get the government we deserve.

    220

    • #
      yarpos

      are we that stupid? well we are stupid enough to have arrived at the current situation, we are stupid enought to watch Jay Weatherill just keep piling on suidicidal decisions in SA, we are stupid enough to not retain basic natural resources for our own use, we are stupid enough to have elected energy ministers that think renewables drive down costs. So yes I think we are that stupid and then some.

      190

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Stand back and let SA die…..

        The ISS astronaughts will just have to double check their coordinates to see whether they are over North Korea, or the glorious South Australian Soviet…. both will be as dark as each other at night….

        SA could revive its car manufacturing – buuilding the infamous dirty 2-stroke Trabant

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabant

        “The engine produced very smoky exhaust and significant air pollution – nine times the hydrocarbons and five times the carbon monoxide emissions of the average European car of 2007. The fuel consumption was 7 l/100 km (40 mpg‑imp; 34 mpg‑US).[12] Since the engine did not have an oil injection system, two-stroke oil had to be added to the 24-liter (6.3 U.S. gal; 5.3 imp gal) fuel tank[13] every time the car was filled up, at a 50:1 or 33:1 ratio of fuel to oil. Gas stations of the time, in countries where two-stroke engines were common, served premixed gas-oil mixture from the pump. Today, owners carry a container of two-stroke oil in the car for this purpose. Because the car lacked a fuel pump, the fuel tank had to be placed above the motor in the engine compartment so that fuel could be fed to the carburetor by gravity; a trade-off of this design was an increased fire risk in front-end accidents. Earlier models had no fuel gauge; a dipstick was inserted into the tank to determine how much fuel remained.”

        40

    • #
      Dennis

      Voters do not have to vote for Labor Green or Liberal National candidates.

      The support for the above has slipped from traditionally 80 per cent of the vote down to 60 per cent according to polling studies.

      If voters choose carefully the next federal government could be a minority alliance as in 2010, and not led by Labor.

      Noting that The Australian today reports that the union movement that controls Labor has a $1.5 billion fund or war chest.

      And as Max Walsh wrote in The Bulletin magazine during 2006, the unions took control of the ALP and parachuted trained union executives into safe Labor electorate seats. The objective is to control all Australian governments.

      100

      • #
        Peter C

        Maybe there is some hope if we get a minority alliance at the next election.

        Until then I suppose that the madness will continue

        60

      • #
        RickWill

        There is a reasonable chance SA, Victoria and NSW will have power constraints imposed this year. That should bring the wind and solar to the top of the agenda for politicians. WA and Queensland voters should realise they have dodged a bullet.

        The only sensible solution is to limit grid connected generation to dispatchable power. That means eliminating the RET. Consumers with grid connected generation will need to go off grid, pay to export or prevent export.

        All the “official” modelling I have seen on solar and wind is laughably naive. This shows how deluded the whole situation is:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLV_dSPYTsI
        Here is the energy market operator trying to demonstrate that they know what they are doing. Their sort of “planning” allowed generators onto the grid with control software that allowed SA to go black. They allowed wind generators to connect to the grid with power lines that cannot withstand a 10yr ARI wind event. They have allowed 1600MW of wind power on the SA network that has been capped at 1200MW for stability reasons. They allowed SA to eliminate its major sources of low cost coal generation so that it is now reliant on gas. Right now gas is producing 1000MW of their 1300MW load. Wind is producing 760MW but the majority is being exported.

        I suspect the gas generators in SA have struck a deal to provide system stability whereby they can increase output to increase income. The current LGC price is providing a windfall for the wind and solar generators and they will actually benefit from reduced output with rising LGCs. It does not matter how much wind or solar generation actually gets produced because the transfer from consumers to intermittent generations is a decreed proportion of their electricity bill and rising. LGCs could reach astronomical levels if intermittent production is low.

        80

        • #
          Raven

          All the “official” modelling I have seen on solar and wind is laughably naive. This shows how deluded the whole situation is:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLV_dSPYTsI

          And not a single comment on that YouTube video published on Jun 22, 2017.
          Amazing.

          20

          • #

            I was going to watch this, and got as far as, “I’ll start by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land.” Groan.

            30

          • #
            Ross Stacey

            I believe the presentation by AEMO is very well thought out and shows how it could be possible to have 100% renewables reliably operating.
            The problem not addressed is cost. Of course the basic reason, Why, is not examined.
            If CO 2 is not a problem then we do not have to go to the expense.

            10

    • #
      James

      The new name for South Australia is southern North Korea. The electricity supply is just as good.

      100

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    Given a choice, I would not squander my wealth on unreliables.
    There are more interesting things –

    It’s faster horses, younger women,
    Older whiskey, and more money
    ” [Tom T. Hall]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvMcX95G20

    50

    • #
      Mark D.

      Cheers to T. T. Hall but he doesn’t add well.

      I prefer faster women, younger horses cheaper whiskey and all that adds up to more money.

      40

  • #

    The true (unsubsidized) dollar cost relation is a proxy for energy relation. Tax and subsidy can obscure the true cost but not the energy relation. The energy consumed to design, manufacture, install, maintain and administer renewables appears to exceed the energy they produce in their lifetime.

    Without the energy provided by other sources these renewables could not exist.

    80

    • #
      PeterS

      As usual Australia likes to outsource things. In effect the new coal fired power stations other nations are building will be used to manufacture products that we import and no longer can build ourselves due to the higher cost of electricity. This country is heading over the cliff very soon.

      140

      • #
        Dennis

        That GDP growth is hovering around 2 per cent should be of concern to all Australians, our economy needs 3.5 per cent to move forward.

        70

  • #
    Dennis

    The PM has saved us, he has announced that his negotiations with the owners of Liddel Power Station in NSW ensures that it will continue operating for another five years.

    If only he could discover another old hydro extension plan to announce.

    50

    • #
      manalive

      That’s no solution, just ‘kicking the can down the road’ Turnbull typically putting off confronting a difficult issue or making an important decision.

      80

    • #
      Ross

      Unfortunately the owners are NOT in negotiations with the government. AGL have reiterated that they will be closing down the Liddel Power Station as planned, and getting out of coal.
      There are no negotiations.
      A desperate government will say anything.

      50

      • #
        el gordo

        Wait a minute …

        ‘Delta Electricity, the NSW power producer owned by coal champions Trevor St Baker and Brian Flannery, has become the first energy player to put up its hand to buy AGL Energy’s Liddell coal-fired power plant, which the government wants to keep running after its slated closure date in 2022.’

        AFR

        20

  • #
    Albert

    The technology gap to a future with renewables was too great, the fools jumped in too early and left us paying high prices with blackouts, they were warned

    70

  • #
    gnome

    They need now to hold survey to ask people if they are willing to pay a bit less for reliable power.

    Sure, it means more money in people’s pockets, but that can’t be all bad, can it?

    70

  • #
    Ross

    What was the answer to the question: How much extra are you willing to pay for the government to buy and operate 45 year old coal powered power stations. $1? $10? $20?

    22

  • #
    GTB

    Electricity

    Our problems started in the eighties when the government of the day realised that the electricity generation and distribution authorities held substantial reserves.
    These reserves were used for network expansion, new substations and power stations. These statutory authorities were set up using the English model. They were like non profit organisations. For example, The Sydney County Council in Sydney.
    However the government could not just take the reserves with the then current setup.
    An act of parliament was required. This was duly done with a long term eye to privatisation. Of course the people were told how this would lower the cost of electricity, not that that was necessary as prices were reasonable.
    The next step was to tell these new organisations that they would have to borrow the money for future expansion and pay a dividend to the government (a stealth tax).
    The management was changed from electrical engineers to economists. One organisation had vast storage for spare parts. This meant that just about any breakdown could be repaired quickly. However the new management deemed this to be uneconomic and the spare parts were sold to private contractors . Anything left was sent to the tip. Staff numbers were reduced. This produced less system reliability but it set the stage for the next step, privatisation. All the time the people were told that this would lower costs. Now it seems that the business model for privatisation was designed to increase profits as our power stations were retired. What a diabolical plan. There seems to be no money to build new real power stations, only government subsidies for renewables. As time goes on the whole system will become unreliable. Even foreign governments can buy infrastructure. This opens the possibility that our economy can be manipulated. Did I hear someone say the word “treason “. This has all the marks of a long term plan but what can we do, governments don’t listen.

    231

    • #
      CriddleDog

      GTB, plus another dozen green thumbs!

      20

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘This opens the possibility that our economy can be manipulated.’

      The NSW government just sold off the last of its poles and wires to a Canadian consortium and a group from Qatar, who are under a land, sea and air blockade.

      40

  • #

    People have absolutely no concept of what coal fired power provides, and I apologise for just listing boring old facts here in a list.

    The total Nameplate for coal fired power in Australia is currently 23019MW, and it regularly supplies between 15000MW and 19000MW.

    It supplies that power from 16 coal fired power plants with 48 Units in all. At any one time there are at least 7 of those Units out of service for maintenance.

    So we have 48 Units supplying a Nameplate of 23019MW, and while different plants have different sized units, let’s then reduce that Nameplate to a simple average.

    That average PER UNIT is a tick under 480MW.

    There is NO single wind plant in the whole of Australia that has a Nameplate of that size. The closest is Macarthur with a Nameplate of 420MW, and that has 140 turbines ….. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY, and still not even close to the average size of ONE coal fired Unit. Keep in mind that wind power only has a Capacity Factor (CF) of 30%, so that takes the average for Macarthur down to only 126MW.

    When you take the total for ALL wind power in Australia, there’s a Nameplate of 4400MW and with the CF, that’s down to 1320MW.

    So, the average for wind power is just less than the average of THREE coal fired UNITS, and there are 48 of those.

    Liddell looks like being the next one to go. It’s not as good as it was when it was new, so instead of making its full Nameplate of 500, that maximum is now down around 450MW.

    Currently, right now, Liddell has one unit offline. The remaining three Units get ramped up and down for the daily Peaks (two of them in the cooler Months) and during yesterday evening’s Peak those three Units were generating 1260MW for seven hours straight.

    So here we have a technically ancient power plant approaching the end of its life close to 50 years old, delivering, (from only three of its four Units) just slightly less power than the average from EVERY wind plant in Australia on average.

    Close down Liddell, and there goes all of that power, around (theoretically with all units operational) 1800MW.

    Queensland is what is currently keeping NSW afloat, delivering around 1100MW on an almost continuous basis into Northern NSW. Queensland is already keeping NSW afloat, so the extra power won’t be coming from Queensland.

    Victoria regularly (during the Peaks) delivers power into NSW, but their 10 Units at the remaining three plants (Loy Yang A and B and Yallourn W) are currently virtually flat lining in their power delivery, already supplying SouthAus, sometimes Tasmania, and also NSW.

    Close Liddell, and there goes NSW.

    The problem with these ancient plants, like Hazelwood before it, and now Liddell, is with the Boilers themselves, and it’s not just a general maintenance thing. They virtually need to be totally replaced, and that’s a costly exercise, considering that the plant is already approaching the end of its time anyway, so it’s a case of shut it down, knowing the enormous cost of those boilers, and the probability that it might not be recovered even if it does extend the life slightly. Even so, those old coal fired plants make it to 50 years, something wind and solar can only dream about.

    It would all have been moot anyway had Bayswater been given approval to construct new tech USC on its brown field site almost ten years back now.

    As I mentioned at the top, people have no concept of what coal fired power actually delivers, and until they are actually told the facts, this ridicul0u$ belief that renewables can deliver the needed power will persist, and it will just be blase business as usual. They need to be shocked out of that belief, because without those rapidly dwindling coal fired assets, Australia will, quite literally, just ….. STOP.

    18000MW minimum power consumption, and 80% Plus from coal fired power.

    There is no substitute.

    Tony.

    310

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Australia seems to be selected for a slow death by strangling its power generation..

      Internal sabotage?

      110

    • #
      Ross

      Tony
      I’ve just watched Di Natali (sp?) being interviewed on Sky. You need to send him an “idiots” guide to the importance of coal fired base load generation. He seems to think there is no problem in Australia –you have to be smarter in how you use energy and in any case renewables will soon be much cheaper than coal etc etc.
      Put simply -while you have relatively high profile people like him spouting that nonsense, solutions will never be found.

      60

      • #

        Look I know that I’m a normally optimistic person, but I can’t help feeling a little more optimistic in recent days with a number of people from different places talking coal fired power, much more than normal, to the point where it’s actually beginning to bubble.

        All this will just add up together, and soon the real truth will just find its way to the surface, when people begin to actually ask the right questions, and actually go looking for answers.

        When that happens, and the realisation sinks in, people like this Leader of The Greens will have nowhere to hide, having nailed their colours to the mast so starkly like he and his fellow Green cohorts, and for that fact, Butler, Shorten, and others so vocal in Labor, and they will have nowhere to hide, no room to take a backward step, because behind them, all they have left there is an abyss that will swallow them up.

        I say just let them dig their own holes, because they will look so bad when the truth comes out. They’ll have nowhere to go.

        I keep seeing those Greens with a totally dumbfounded look on their faces, eyes flicking left and right, saying into the mirror ….. “What just happened then?”

        They will be so discredited, not just because of what they said, but the realisation from their supporters and others that they failed outright to actually check with someone who knows. They just made it up as they went along.

        Tony.

        110

    • #
      Ross Stacey

      Tony, what do you think of the presentation from AEMO shown here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLV_dSPYTsI

      00

  • #

    Liddell looks like being the next one to go. It’s not as good as it was when it was new, so instead of making its full Nameplate of 500, that maximum is now down around 450MW.

    This could be misread here, so those totals I have there are for each of the four separate Units, for a total of 2000MW when new, and currently around 1800MW

    Tony.

    160

  • #
    Mark M

    You can trick gullible pollies.. but lying to the ASX is criminal.

    Market Announcement
    Dated: 29 June 2017
    Tilt Renewables notes below average wind conditions for the June 2017 quarter

    “Tilt Renewables Limited (“Tilt Renewables”) advises that lower wind conditions in the current quarter, and particularly well below average wind speeds in South Australia for the month of June, have resulted in significantly lower production compared to Management expectations.

    Production from Tilt Renewables’ Australian assets for June will represent the lowest month of production since the full commissioning of these assets in 2008 and 2014 respectively.

    The New Zealand portfolio has also been impacted by unseasonably low wind speeds with production from these assets anticipated to be 18% below expectations for the June quarter.”

    https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/260851.pdf

    80

  • #
    Bruce

    Thank you Jo, we are living in insane times. Lenin’s Long March Through The Institutions, has been very effective on our “educated and enlightened” globalist “leaders”. They are willfully ignoring the riding instructions of their owners(voters). Sadly the Globalist Disease, has infected the Left, Right and Centre. The Swiss Referendum System, looks better by the day. In addition, I found your contribution to IPA’s Climate Change The Facts 2017, informative, edifying and of your usual rigorous honesty and accuracy.

    80

    • #

      Paradoxical ain’t it?
      Open Society allows Gramsci-ites
      democratic rights and they
      do institutional creep and impose
      18C constraints on cits’ free speech.

      A serf.

      20

  • #
    Robber

    The increased cost of electricity is due to stupid government interventions.
    Total average demand about 20,000 MW, that’s 175,200,000 MWhr per year.
    Wholesale prices have risen from $50/MWhr to $100/MWhr.
    That’s an increase in costs of $8.76 billion per year just in generation costs alone.
    Add further costs to allow for investment in the grid to cope with intermittent and distributed supplies.
    Meanwhile the pollies waffle – it’s not their money.
    And they will continue to shift the blame, saying it’s not their fault.

    70

  • #
    Mark M

    Man in fossil-fuelled helicopter says you must pay a carbon (sic) tax to drive your car.

    40

    • #

      At that article, scroll down to the second image showing Malcolm proudly strolling past the major Snowy pumped hydro plant at Tumut 3.

      So then, just how good is a pumped storage supply, considering here we have this one being used as an example.

      Tumut 3 has a Nameplate of 1500MW and has 6 Units, so each one generates 250MW.

      Since I’ve been doing this Base Load thing, ten weeks now, I have included Hydro as part of the data for that 4AM point in time of minimum power consumption.

      As part of that I occasionally isolate just Tumut 3 to check out how much it is being worked.

      Tumut regularly supplies, umm, 250MW for two to three hours during the morning peak, and two to three hours during the evening peak. So, one of the six Units in operation for a short time. On the odd occasion, a second Unit has delivered, but usually only for part of those already existing time periods.

      So, one Unit is running for perhaps 5 or 6 hours a day, during the peaks. So, not only is it not covering Base Load, it’s not even covering Peak Loads to any great extent. 250MW during the evening Peak of around 27000MW PLUS comes in at around 0.9% of actual generation. Not even one percent.

      How good is that eh? (/sarc)

      Gives real hope as to what Snowy 2.0 will be doing eh!

      Tony.

      111

      • #
        toorightmate

        I know what Snowy2.0 will be doing – WASTING POWER.

        70

      • #
        David Maddison

        Hi Tony, here is some more info on Tumut 3. It is from an article I wrote on pumped hydro storage in the Jan 2017 Silicon Chip magazine.

        The Tumut 3 power station of the Snowy Mountains Hydroelectric Scheme was Australia’s first pumped hydroelectric storage scheme, completed in 1973. In 2003 six micro-hydro generators, each of which has a power output of 140kW, were added to the outlets of the six generator cooling systems, which recovered otherwise wasted energy.

        Then in 2009-11 Tumut was upgraded with new turbine runners and other improvements to each of its six generators, increasing its overall power output from 1500MW to its present capacity of 1800MW (1.8GW), under ideal conditions.

        Even though the Francis turbines used at Tumut 3 could theoretically be used for pumping (as at other pumped storage facilities), in this case there are separate under-slung pump units for pumping water.

        Tumut 3 pumps water between its lower reservoir at Jounama Pondage and Talbingo Reservoir as its upper storage. The water head is approximately 155 metres.

        Snowy Hydro has not published the electrical storage capacity of Tumut 3 or the way it is used in typical operation but we estimate it as follows: there is approximately 160 gigalitres of active water storage. The six turbines (before the upgrade) had a total discharge capacity of 1,133,000 litres per second. This implies that it would take around 39 hours to discharge all active water storage at maximum power. Hence, there is about 70.2GWh of electrical storage.

        In energy storage mode, the three pumps each have a capacity of 99,000 litres per second (297,000 litres per second total) so the Talbingo Reservoir would take 448 hours to refill, assuming the lower reservoir could store all the water that was discharged. Of course, the storage is unlikely to be fully discharged in normal operation.

        103

      • #
        David Maddison

        Tony, based on your calculations and observations do you know where the “surplus” power will come from to pump water for the Snowy Hydro 2.0 battery?

        63

  • #
    Geoff Barnes

    I’m trying to change my energy supply from AGL (who seem to proudly boast that they waste more money on unreliables than any other provider), to a provider who wastes the least of our money.
    Unfortunately I cant find any info to help me decide.
    I would greatly appreciate any help or links from fellow posters to aid my decision.
    Many thanks in advance.

    00

    • #
      David Maddison

      AGL is in the renewables business because they also own the gas turbine peaking plant from which they get to sell hugely expensive electricity when their renewable wind and solar stops working. It is an ideal business model for them. They get to sell expensive electricity from their renewables and then expensive peaking plant electricity to cover the deficiencies of their defective renewables.

      82

  • #
  • #
    pat

    given the MSM rarely reports honestly about “renewable” energy – instead acting mostly like PR cheerleaders – how informed would pubic opinion be?

    6 Sept: EconomicTimesIndia: Reuters: German power regulator confident about German-French grid in winter
    There is concern in the power industry that French nuclear power supply could be squeezed again in coming months after tight periods in the winter of 2016/17 when a large number of reactors were shut for extensive safety checks
    Reporting by Vera Eckert, editing by Keith Weir
    MUNICH- Germany has arranged power capacity back-up for the coming winter and is equipped to deal with increased demand from its French neighbour should more nuclear outages occur there, its energy regulator said on Tuesday.
    “There are talks about what can be done after we had difficult situations on the cross-border links with France last winter, but the situation was under control,” Jochen Homann, the president of the Bundesnetzagentur agency, told reporters on the sidelines of a conference.
    “We coped with an unprecedented situation, which makes me confident that we can cope again,” he added…

    French nuclear regulator ASN recently made fresh calls on utility EDF to review some components of its reactors in ongoing probes as cooler weather approaches.
    Homann said that the intermittency of renewables had created additional risks to the stability of German networks during calm and overcast conditions in January and February, when renewable production was low.
    As power cannot be easily stored to a large degree, grids have to be carefully balanced by engineers…

    The Bundesnetzagentur has required that the size of a winter power reserve, paid for by consumers, have been increased.
    The Bonn-based agency said earlier this year it will contract 10,400 megawatts (MW) of reserves for the coming winter, nearly double the 5,400 MW last winter, when a maximum of 3,800 MW was called upon on one occasion.

    Under the reserve plans, otherwise idle plants are kept available to produce against a fee if needed.
    http://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/power/german-power-regulator-confident-about-german-french-grid-in-winter/60386488

    20

  • #
    David Maddison

    Approx 1hr video taken at IPA Sydney July 27, 2017. Climate Change, the facts 2017.

    https://youtu.be/yIi1b17HKF8

    22

  • #
    RickWill

    Anyone interested in meeting up with those loudly promoting the gravy train”
    http://www.solarcitizens.org.au/tesla?utm_campaign=tesla_natlaunch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=solarcitizens

    20

  • #
    RoHa

    “22% believe that you can store spare electricity in a shoebox under the bed for a rainy day.”

    And that’s just silly. You need a plastic box. Shoeboxes leak.

    100

  • #
    pat

    what a surprise!

    6 Sept: Byron Echo: Byron ‘eager to get cracking’ on renewables, forum hears
    by Christobel Munson
    (Christobel Munson is from Zero Emissions Byron)
    The keenly interested audience of more than 80 gathered at the Mullum Civic Centre on Thursday night were not disappointed by the promise of ‘a night of action on renewables.’
    Yes, there was talk. But this was talk that packed a punch.

    Keynote speaker Taryn Lane, a manager of Hepburn Wind, Australia’s first community-owned cooperative windfarm in Victoria, provided details of how local communities around the world are working together to reduce their emissions through community investment in large-scale renewable projects.
    She has just returned from a three-month Churchill Fellowship tour where she spoke to zero-net communities all around Europe.

    Taryn said, ‘Many communities globally have already paved the way for us to follow. Communities can secure their own renewable pipeline to 100 per cent. They can own it locally and benefit from it. Having local government leadership is pivotal to this.’
    Dan Fitzgerald, from Small Giants, described the company’s investment policy as ‘using business as a major tool for positive social and environmental impact’…

    Chair of Zero Emissions Byron Limited (ZEB) Vicki Brooke presented the evening and launched a supporters’ group, while mayor Simon Richardson outlined the accomplishments of ZEB in its first two years of operation…

    COREM’s Dr Rob Passey listed the many challenges faced in attempting to resurrect the production of hydroelectric power at Lavertys Gap outside Mullumbimby, while Giles Parkinson, founder and editor of RenewEconomy.com.au, Australia’s leading website on clean technology and climate issues, facilitated the evening and the following Q&A session.

    The following day an ‘action tank’ was held in Byron Council, aiming to get clear and specific about how large-scale renewable projects can be constructed in the Shire within the next 24 months. Key players, ‘eager to get cracking’ in the mayor’s words, ranged from Essential Energy, local investors and relevant providers through to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
    Expect a public announcement shortly.
    https://www.echo.net.au/2017/09/byron-eager-get-cracking-renewables-forum-hears/

    10

  • #
    pat

    5 Sept: LA Times: Rob Nikolewski: Why wind energy has hit a lull in California
    According to the most recent numbers compiled by the California Energy Commission, wind accounts for 36% of generation from renewable facilities — the most in the state, edging out solar.
    One would think those figures would have the state’s leading wind industry group practically giddy…

    This year’s Energy Department report showed installed capacity in California was actually 6 megawatts less in 2016 than in 2015.
    “No. 4 sounds good until you realize we used to be No. 1, fell to No. 2 and No. 3,” Rader said. “And it keeps going down. And it will continue to go down.”
    Rader blames a host of reasons, including land-use restrictions…

    California’s desert areas are considered prime spots for wind farms and in the final months of the Obama administration, a plan was finalized that set aside more than 10 million acres for conservation and recreation and designated 388,000 acres for clean energy development, such as solar and wind projects.
    Rader said that number is too small, saying about 80% of federal land in the desert is off-limits to wind farms.

    At the same time, several counties across the state have issued their own restrictions.
    Los Angeles County recently passed a renewable energy ordinance that bans large-scale wind turbines in unincorporated areas.
    San Diego County in 2013 adopted rule changes for wind projects, with Rader complaining that an inclusion of a noise restriction is too strict.
    Inyo and Solano counties have also put in place restrictions for wind projects.
    “We’re facing restrictions like that all around the state,” Rader said. “You can’t put a wind project anywhere. You have to go where there’s good wind, and that’s in really limited areas.”

    Resistance to large-scale wind projects may be surprising, given California policymakers’ commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But pushback also has been seen in a score of states, including Vermont, which also prides itself on clean energy credentials.
    Resistance also comes from some residents in rural areas who say wind farms mar views and raise quality of life issues.

    “You want to go with renewables but then you get down to the county level and people say it’s a disturbance, it lowers our land value and we don’t want to see it,” said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an organization based in Sacramento whose 90 members in the West buy and sell power.
    “It’s fascinating that a state that most people see as the leader in renewable energy development has counties that are saying, not in our backyards, not in our front yards and not in the side yard.”

    Environmentalists in general favor wind projects, but some green groups have opposed individual projects…
    In San Diego’s East County, construction has begun on the Tule Wind Project in the McCain Valley, but the facility has been opposed by the Protect Our Communities Foundation since plans for the 12,000-acre project were introduced some 13 years ago.
    The foundation’s executive director, April Rose Sommer, said her group likes clean energy but believes the Tule project poses a significant danger to birds — golden eagles in particular.
    “In this case the damage done to the environment, the damage it does to birds … is not worth what you get out of wind power,” Sommer said…

    Offshore wind farms are a common sight in countries such as Denmark, but only one has been constructed in the U.S. and none has been erected on the West Coast, where the continental shelf plunges so steeply that it’s impractical to bolt turbines into the seabed…
    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wind-energy-california-20170905-story.html

    30

  • #
    Mark M

    Delta Electricity Chairman Trevor St Bake, 0.10 sec:

    “What they need is the bi-partisan acknowledgement that we need a certain margin in the textbooks for power generation, for power supplies, you need a baseload generation margin of continually dispatchable baseload power.

    That’s textbook 101 for power planting, but, the other thing you need, you need bi-partisan demonstration to the people of Australia that both sides of politics understands that:
    A. We need base load power.
    B. Australia doesn’t have nuclear and it doesn’t have enough precipitation to have base load hydro.

    The only baseload we in Australia have is coal, and if you get rid of coal, you don’t have power when the sun goes down and the wind stops blowing.

    And you certainly won’t have economical power if you try and base load on wind and solar.”

    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/905275422677413888

    20

  • #
    pat

    6 Sept: Townsville Bulletin: Upgrades won’t fix bill pain
    by DOMANII CAMERON
    UPGRADING Queensland’s existing coal-fired power stations will not do enough to reduce electricity prices in the North, says Queensland ­Resources Council chief executive Ian Macfarlane.
    It comes after suggestions from the Federal Government that extending the lifespan of existing coal-fired power plants would avert a baseload power crisis, amid growing pressure to endorse a renewable energy target.

    Mr Macfarlane said there was a common misconception that renewable energy was the same price as electricity generated from coal.
    “I think people have aligned their power bill expectations with that,” he said.
    “The reality is that it is ­adding to their power bills.”
    A recent Newspoll conducted for The Australian found that 49 per cent of survey ­participants would not pay extra for renewable energy.

    “I think everyone is starting to come to the conclusion that we must have coal in the grid going forward.
    “The question is, do we need a new plant or ­upgrade old ones?
    “(Upgrading) doesn’t solve the problem of higher electricity costs in North Queensland. I think everyone realises that we need coal, except the State Government.”…

    Burdekin One Nation ­candidate Sam Cox said Queensland’s future was to power the rest of Australia…
    “Why not build two HELE coal-fired power stations and export to other states?”

    However, Townsville MP Scott Stewart said while Mr Cox’s idea sounded good, it was not realistic.
    “Building coal-fired power stations, we (Labor) are ­certainly against,” he said…ETC
    http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/news/upgrades-wont-fix-bill-pain/news-story/5aa9ca65b908003eb41bdeb03acc43b6

    20

  • #
    John Watt

    The survey question is misleading. Via RET/REC process we are already paying for renewables. Better question “How much are you paying for renewable energy?” Don’t know? Give them the answer. Then give them a pro-forma letter to Turnbull/Frydenberg requesting that they direct the retailers to include on the bill details of how much RET/REC is included in that bill.

    80

  • #
    pat

    6 Sept: news.com.au: Hinch calls out govt on power station help
    A key crossbench senator wants to know why the Turnbull government is looking at saving a coal-fired power station when more wasn’t done to keep Hazelwood open.
    by Jennifer Rajca, AAP
    A Senate crossbencher wants to know why the federal government didn’t do more to keep the Hazelwood power station open as it looks to save another ageing plant in NSW…

    Independent senator Derryn Hinch has his staff working on how much it will cost to re-open the Hazelwood plant in Victoria.
    “If they are going to spend a fortune either buying (Liddell) or paying to keep it open I’d love to know why the hell they closed Hazelwood in the first place,” he told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday.
    “It would be a lot cheaper to keep Hazelwood and keep people at work in Victoria than buy a new or existing other station.”

    Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm said while governments owning power plants was normally against his “religion” even he had to admit something had to be done to keep the lights on.
    He warned Australians on low incomes were struggling to stay warm, citing Liberal MP Craig Kelly’s prediction people will die if they can’t afford to keep the heater working.
    “If it takes the federal government to chuck some money at it I might have to hold my nose and not complain too badly.”

    Senator Matt Canavan, who recently stood aside as resources minister, said AGL on the one hand was saying it wants to get out of coal and on the other making millions on the back of it.
    “AGL are the biggest hypocrites walking around Australia at the moment,” he told ABC radio.
    Senator Leyonhjelm went further, describing them as a “bunch of wankers”.
    “They’re going to lose me as a customer,” he said…

    Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie hopes a commercial buyer can keep the plant open for another five years.
    “It’s very cute to have the type of conversations that those on the left are keen to have that we can just put up another wind farm, just get another diesel generator from Bunnings down the road without realising that these things take time,” she said…
    http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/hinch-calls-out-govt-on-power-station-help/news-story/de4b63fef6eea05e8f5dfb30f4e72ed3

    00

  • #
    pat

    comment in moderation re “6 Sept: news.com.au: Hinch calls out govt on power station help”

    20

  • #
    pat

    ***as credible or incredible as the Newspoll:

    5 Sept: HuffPo: Anthony Sharwood: The Best Evidence Yet Of A Seismic Shift In Opinion On Climate Change
    ‘I actually think we’re winning.’
    Amanda McKenzie spends her life talking about climate change.
    McKenzie, 34, is CEO of the Climate Council — the publicly-funded body which provides independent, authoritative climate change information to the Australian public. And she says opinion is shifting in terms of the number of people who accept climate science.
    How does McKenzie know?

    Because of two of the oldest, most reliable barometers of public opinion — barbies and cabbies.
    “Over the time I’ve been working in climate change we’ve seen a massive decline in people who don’t think it’s happening, or who don’t think that humans have any role to play,” McKenzie told HuffPost Australia in the latest episode of our Breaking The Ice podcast.
    “In the past, people at a BBQ or somewhere like that would get me in a corner and start raving about how climate change isn’t happening. That actually doesn’t happen anymore.
    “One of the barometers I have of public opinion is the views of taxi drivers… and for the last two or three years, you’re just hearing less and less commentary from taxi drivers about climate change being something that is NOT happening, and much more concern about extreme weather events getting worse, and enthusiasm for renewable energy.”

    You can listen to our whole podcast with Amanda in the player below (or here, along with other episodes from both series 1 and 2).

    In episodes 4 and 5 of the current series of Breaking The Ice, we learned how U.S. Republican political strategist Frank Luntz first set in motion attacks on climate science.
    “One of his most famous quotes was if you want to get a message across, you say it over and over and over and over again, until you’re sick to death of saying it. And only then people are hearing it for the first time,” climate science communications expert John Cook told us.

    Amanda McKenzie said something almost identical in Breaking The Ice.
    “I suppose it’s not rocket science in terms of how you change public opinion. We can think facts will win the day which isn’t necessarily the case. It is really what gets said the most.
    “We we have facts on our side and we have the expert opinion, but we also need to package it up in lots of different ways that are relevant to people and say it over and over again.”…

    “I think that ultimately we are winning the public debate. Most people in Australia — and this is brought out by the polling — they say that climate change is happening,” McKenzie said.

    ***”They understand that renewable energy is a solution, that it’s positive, that it’s cheaper than fossil fuels and we’ll need to invest in it heavily.”…ETC
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/09/04/the-best-evidence-yet-of-a-seismic-shift-in-opinion-on-climate-change_a_23196690/

    10

    • #
      pat

      HuffPo//Sharwood piece continues:

      “One poll of the type to which McKenzie referred was this Essential Report poll published in February.”
      (SHOWS ONE QUESTION FROM 21 FEBRUARY REPORT, WHICH HAS 60% of Australians believing climate change is happening and caused by human activity primarily by humans, up from percentages in the 50s for all the other years shown)

      this Essential Report was mentioned in a comment on the following thread:

      JoanneNova: Y’think Donald Trump will bring in a carbon tax? (And pigs will knit socks.)
      COMMENT: 16.2
      Graeme No.3
      February 23, 2017 at 9:59 am
      We have a problem under the continuous barrage of propaganda about “climate change”.
      Look at the lastest essential poll of South Australians. 65% support the 50% RET to 18% no, 45% believe that renewables were NOT responsible for the latest blackouts in SA to 16% yes. Finally 60% believe climate change caused predominantly by humans is real compared to the no vote of 25%. ( reader’s comment in The Australian, not checked).
      http://joannenova.com.au/2017/02/and-donald-trump-will-bring-in-a-carbon-tax/

      not mentioned by HuffPo/Sharwood is it was a ***GUARDIAN/Essential Report! LOL:

      21 February 2017: The Guardian Essential Report
      Do you believe that there is fairly conclusive evidence that climate change is happening?
      (60% SAY YES TO: Climate change is happening and is caused by human activity)

      The Labor party has committed to a target of 50% renewable energy by 2030. Do you approve or disapprove of this policy?
      (65% Approve)

      Some people have said recent power black outs are a result of too much reliance on renewable energy. Others have said they have occurred because of failures in the way the energy market responds to extreme weather events (i.e. storms and high temperatures) or that privatization of services is the problem. Which is closest to your view?
      45% agree – The power black outs are due mainly to failures of the energy market in responding to extreme weather events
      16% agree – The power black outs are the result of too much reliance on renewable energy

      64% agree – Do you think renewable energy is the solution or a threat to our future energy needs?

      Do you think the federal government is doing enough, not enough or too much to ensure affordable, reliable and clean energy for Australian households and businesses?
      71% say – Not doing enough

      Would you support or oppose building new coal fired power stations in Australia?
      45% totally oppose
      25% oppose
      (NEEDLESS TO SAY, LESS SUPPORT) ETC…
      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2017/feb/21/the-guardian-essential-report-february-21-results

      what a load of BS.

      20

    • #
      pat

      btw the link HuffPo/Sharwood provide for the Essential poll actually takes you to their latest Report, which has:

      PDF: 12 pages: 5 Sept: Essential Report: Power prices
      Q Who or what do you mostly blame most for rising power prices?
      CHART
      49% think private power companies trying to maximise profits are most to blame for rising power prices and 22% think the Turnbull Government is
      most to blame. 9% blame environmentalists pushing for action on climate change and only 5% blame renewable energy costs.
      http://www.essentialvision.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Essential-Report_050917.pdf

      5 Sept: RenewEconomy: Sophie Vorrath: Voters blame energy companies – and PM – for sky-high power prices
      The Essential Poll, the results of which were published on Tuesday, shows that while almost half of respondents (49 per cent) blamed the profit seeking behaviour of private power companies for soaring electricity prices, a noteworthy 22 per cent believed that the Turnbull government was mostly to blame.

      That’s reassuring, because it is becoming increasingly evident that it is the bidding of generator companies in wholesale markets that is pushing up wholesale prices, as the latest regulator analysis shows quite clearly (LINK)…

      What is more, less than half of that number – 9 per cent – put the blame on the push for action on climate change; while just 5 per cent blamed renewable energy costs – the Coalition’s traditional scapegoat for rising power costs…READ ON
      http://reneweconomy.com.au/voters-blame-energy-companies-pm-sky-high-power-prices-87361/

      00

      • #
        pat

        unsurprisingly, this Essential Report is also a GUARDIAN/Essential report:

        5 Sept: The Guardian Essential Report
        This report summarises the results of a weekly poll conducted by Essential Research with data provided by Your Source…
        Who or what do you mostly blame most for rising power prices?…ETC

        (READ “NOTES” AT BOTTOM)
        Notes
        The data gathered for this report is gathered from a weekly online omnibus conducted by Your Source. Essential Research has been utilizing the Your Source online panel to conduct research on a week-by-week basis since November 2007.
        Each week, the team at Essential Media Communications discusses issues that are topical and a series of questions are devised to put to the Australian public. Some questions are repeated regularly (such as political preference and leadership approval), while others are unique to each week and reflect media and social issues that are present at the time.
        Your Source has a self-managed consumer online panel of over 100,000 members. The majority of panel members have been recruited using off line methodologies, effectively ruling out concerns associated with online self-selection…ETC
        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2017/sep/05/the-guardian-essential-report-5-september-results

        very little info on the “Your Source” website about who they really are.

        nothing is credible about these polls, as far as I’m concerned.
        they reek of CAGW propaganda.

        10

        • #
          pat

          LinkedIn: Your Source, Market Research
          201-500 employees
          We Build Strategic partnerships leading to quality and low-cost outcomes for our client.

          ***We take our corporate responsibility seriously and are committed to reducing our environmental footprint
          by working towards a sustainable business plan that reduces waste and encourages staff and clients to
          do the same.
          Type: Privately held
          https://au.linkedin.com/company/your-source

          00

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Actually Pat the top two are reasons are pretty close to the mark when you think about it , greedy companies wanting to maximise their profits by installing renewables and racking in the subsidies.
    Turdball, well there’s the RET and if he was any good he would have called for more coal fired power way back when he stabbed the other loser in the back .

    00

  • #
    cedarhill

    Even 82% won’t mean much unless it translates into votes against the politicians that vote for the renewable energy industry.

    20

  • #

    Finally! Objective proof that Australians have not degenerated into fools under the weight of coerced voting! This recalls the Ambrose Bierce fantastic fable, which today would be titled “The Altruist Principle and the Material Interest.” These Fantastic Fables are posted free on Gutenberg.org.

    00

  • #
    Egor the One

    How do we vote against this ‘Ruinables Energies Racket’ ???

    00