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

Coal, a dying industry, just became Australia’s number one export (again)

Coal is a dying industry, but luckily for the Australian economy, the rest of the world is not as smart as The Australian Greens and Labor Party and they are still buying it.

Coal is set to regain its spot as the nation’s biggest export earner amid higher prices and surging demand from Asia, sparking fresh calls from the Turnbull government for Labor to end its “war on coal”.

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science figures show total coal exports are forecast to reach $58.1 billion in 2018-19, overtaking iron ore ($57.7bn) for the first time in ­almost a decade.

We’ve only got 300 years of these kind of coal profits to go.

The big question, do we open up more coal mines now and rake in the dough, or try to make the weather nicer in one thousand years time? Tricky…

Resources Minister Matthew Canavan said new export forecasts strengthened the investment case for Adani’s proposed $16.5 billion Carmichael coalmine and the development of Queensland’s Galilee Basin, which federal Labor has opposed. “Opening up the Galilee would generate 16,000 direct mining jobs and tens of billions in taxes.”

What do Australia’s big four banks do — ask Greenpeace for investment advice

In 2015, the National Australia Bank and Commonwealth bank announced they were refusing to finance Adani’s Carmichael Coal Mine. Then the ANZ agreed, and finally Westpac jumped on the anti-coal bandwagon too. Apparently, “Australian coal is an unbankable deposit”, at least according to Daid Holmes, Senior Lecturer, Communications and Media Studies. But what would he know? About as much as our four biggest bankers.

So none of our big banks would finance a major project in our largest export industry.

Screwed nation.

 


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (79 votes cast)
Coal, a dying industry, just became Australia's number one export (again), 9.8 out of 10 based on 79 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/yb3dftok

139 comments to Coal, a dying industry, just became Australia’s number one export (again)

  • #
    RobK

    Thanks Jo,
    You’ve summed it up well.

    170

  • #
    Gordon

    So what happened to all the wind turbines and solar panels that were going to replace coal? What about that super battery from Musk? If this alternative stuff is so great why has it not replaced coal yet?
    Could there be a problem of some kind?

    350

    • #
      Just Thinkin'

      Gordon,

      The problem?

      Could it be that the “ruinables” cannot control frequency?

      Check the number of warnings about an unstable system for
      SA that are issued by our NEM on the AEMO web site.

      Get rid of all the inter-connectors TO SA.

      Let them reap what they sow……

      260

      • #

        Just Thinkin’ “Could it be that the “ruinables” cannot control frequency?” Sort of. While the root cause of the problem is a whole lot simpler. It is actually very very simple and easy for solar and wind etc to provide a stable frequency while the are contributing power. They don’t do that because it would make problems worse. All radios, TV’s, computers, wrist watches and mobile phones these days contain circuitry capable of maintaining frequency accuracy and controlling larger things with this is simple tech, very easy. The real problem would be easier to spot if you did that. This because as the sun goes behind a cloud or the wind stops these systems would suddenly shut down instead of tapering down. They would shut down at the point they can no longer contribute. This in turn would result in sudden instability. Another way to see the real problem is imagine Edisons DC system won the day years ago over Tesla’s AC grid. We now have a fixed stable frequency of 0Hz. The problem, though greatly simplified with no phase or frequency errors, remains. The solar and wind are still switching on and off unpredictably. All the other systems need to adjust and react to maintain the supply when they go off and again when they come back on. This takes time and during the transitions ugly unwanted AC would form on the DC grid. Rouge voltage and current waves of back EMF and ringing PID change rate errors complicated by delay times and resistance along transmission lines and the normally fluctuating load.

        112

        • #
          WXcycles

          Well yeah, but mostly it’s because they are uneconomic financial sinkholes.

          80

          • #

            “mostly it’s because they are uneconomic financial sinkholes.” Yes I fear batteries attached to reneutered unpredictables may soon be profiting from selling coal, gas or even hydro power back to the grid after massive energy losses as green energy. While genuinely assisting by absorbing instabilities caused by both fluctuating load and supply, they could falsely make the green hallucination look viable until us victims notice again, the prices still going up.

            10

      • #
        crakar24

        Hey i live in that sh%^%$#@t hole you cannot just abandon me like that

        90

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          crakar24:

          Why not? The State Government (either sort) has abandonned us.

          Are you involved in the by-election? I haven’t decided to who to vote for.. the major parties all of whom want more renewables = higher electricity prices, or the ‘independent’ whom wants more renewables = higher electricity prices.

          For once I understand why some people deface their voting slip with comments – I must take a Texta when I vote.

          90

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            second whom should be who.

            20

            • #
              crakar24

              Do you mean Mayo? I used to be in that seat but now in another one Makin i think with Champion. I saw Downer at the local shop once buying some milk for his mother, i looked at him and he knew i was the only person there that recognised him. I said hello how are you and the look of dread on his face changed to one of relief, i guess you had to be there.

              50

              • #
                Graeme No.3

                Strange. I have seen him chatting with people in (what was) his local supermarket car park. Whenever he went through Woodside he seemed to have no trouble talking to people. Were you wearing your Support the Greens T-shirt?

                30

              • #
                Crakar24

                Firstly Williamstown is full of inbred barossians so no one else is as important as them. I was wearing my “the things that batter” t shirt (that will test a few memories)

                10

          • #
            crakar24

            I used to vote for skippy but would do it properly by drawing another box next to his name and then voting 1 to whatever with skip getting the no.1, then i voted for Dr Ron Paul a couple of times and last time i voted for Trump.

            60

  • #

    Renew Economy proudly declares: “In 2017, new coal plant construction commenced at more than one location in only seven countries: Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan and South Korea.”

    So that’s ONLY the massively populous countries who make ALL our stuff.

    Poor silly China, India, Japan, Korea. I’m sure Lichtenstein, Andorra and San Marino must be feeling very smug right now. Prince Albert can’t wipe the grin off his moosh. No coal plants spoiling the Monte Carlo views.

    200

    • #
      Dennis

      What about Germany?

      40

      • #
        sophocles

        Dennis asked:

        What about Germany?

        What about Germany? The days of the three-fingered bat-’n-bird-killers there may be numbered, according to rumblings from within. The initial enthusiasm of the people for their Energiewende. seems to be waning as the magnitude of their follies become steadily and readily more apparent.

        A recent programme aired on DW TV claimed, to the German public at large, that electric cars are nothing more than “Rolling Climate Killers. That’s strong language, but the report, titled “Eco-Swindle E-Auto” didn’t stop there. It pointed out that the CO2 emitted for making one Tesla (it’s that Musk Man again) battery matched the CO2 emitted by an ICE (`Infernal’ Combustion Engine) to cover 200,000km.

        But then, you can read about it all yourself at http://notrickszone.com/2018/07/01/german-public-television-report-electric-cars-a-swindle-rolling-climate-killers Notrickzone for yourself.

        150

        • #
          Latus Dextro

          As I’ve said before and elsewhere, the Tesla’s dirty little secret, lugging 30% of its mass around for the duration of its life as non-negotiable, constant, dead weight, is A THE MOST COLOSSAL WASTAGE OF ENERGY.

          90

          • #

            a point of order. All cars lug around 100% of their weight.

            62

            • #
              Annie

              Thry don’t have massive heavyweight batteries as part of their permanent load, do they? They have an always decreasing load of petrol/ diesel if they are not EV.

              31

            • #
              Crakar24

              What is the weight of an EV?

              00

            • #
              sophocles

              a point of order. All cars lug around 100% of their weight.

              A point of order Gee Aye: only while the petrol tank is full. The car’s weight reduces as fuel is consumed …

              10

          • #
            Hanrahan

            With all that extra weight they should pay more rego, not less. The weight/torque of a tesla would be hell on the bitumen.

            00

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Dennis:

        Spot the little qualifier “commenced at more than one location” – you can plan for more, you can finish more, but you are only allowed (by Renew Economy) to start one per year.

        90

  • #
    Michael Reed

    Oh the hypocrisy the big banks supposedly have well functioning moral green compasses while st the same time have been found lying and cheating to their customers .Dont you just love this
    new age “mass denial”. ie Labor,Turnbull (his running dog lackey Josh) and the greens spouting
    this illogical bias against coal and of course economically destructive path it’s taking Australia along.And all this is being cheered on by the ABC,SBS and the Fairfax press.I think your average
    Aussie is easily conned and led (like a young naive child)on by words and phrases like “emissions,carbon footprint and the importantly sounding Paris Agreement” Mind you
    Alex son of Malcolm made a Motza out of the signing of the Paris Agreement as it caused
    the Large scale generating certificates to double or triple in value oh well !!! and silly dumb
    me and I used to think insider trading was something you could go jail for.The wait and pressure
    of all this propaganda and groupthink makes it difficult for your average “deplorable “to do
    anything but nod and agree with this absurd ideological crap .
    Cheers Mike Reed

    200

    • #
      sophocles

      There’s money available from outside Oz unless there is a law against it. The holding out banks will quickly change their ideas if/when finance arrives from an outside source.

      Their CEO’s morals are all highly elastic when there is lots ‘n lots of money involved and their bank is missing out on it …

      80

    • #
      Robber

      With governments and oppositions committed to “emission” reductions per Paris, any investor has to weigh up the risks of investing in a 40+ year life coal power station. So they all chant “renewables are the future” and ignore costs as we pay the ever increasing bills. The breakthrough will only come when we get a visionary leader who declares that they will provide long term reliable and affordable electricity via coal and/or nuclear.

      80

  • #

    I wonder how the investors think about this? The virtue signalling is strong with this lot, but for how long?

    40

    • #

      Having read some of the links, the financing decision is not really based on the fact that it’s a coal mine, but on general investment risk factors. The banks, in 2015 at least, considered the project high risk. The risk factors may be associated with potential environmental issues, but not the fact that the banks refuse to support a coal mine. It seems that the latter is what the papers might be trying to imply is the reason.

      30

    • #
      Latus Dextro

      In a Green nutshell … if you can bear it.

      THE DIVESTMENT MOVEMENT: A CLIMATE POLICY GAME CHANGER?

      30

      • #
        Bobl

        I love the divest movement big parcels of shares get dumped forcing the company into a dip, it’s always good to buy the dip… I can tell you that BHP doesn’t give a rats about who owns their stock.

        70

  • #
    Mark M

    Prepare for a wetter climate …

    Coal miners to blame for Queensland floods, says Australian Greens leader Bob Brown

    https://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/coal-miners-to-blame-for-queensland-floods-says-australian-greens-leader-bob-brown/news-story/cbfe12042fa9c4149ea3c10524f57344

    > In other news, prepare for beautiful perfect climate … one day …

    Solar pushes mid-day electricity prices below zero in Queensland in the middle of the day-

    https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-pushes-mid-day-electricity-prices-below-zero-in-queensland-70680/

    Wait. What?

    “An odd quirk of renewable energy in Australia is that the bulk of our rooftop solar panels are pointed in the wrong direction.

    Given generous feed-in tariffs offered by states to kickstart the industry, it made sense for households to face panels northwards to maximise the photovoltaic generation they could export to the grid.

    At around 5pm, these panels are next to useless,” Paul McArdle, chief executive of energy software firm, Global-Roam, said.”

    https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/climate-change/renewable-energy-most-solar-panels-next-to-useless-at-key-times-expert-says-20170208-gu7vxr.html

    January 22, 2015: The Queensland Leader of the Opposition Annastacia Palaszczuk has spoken of her desire to triple the number of Queenslanders with solar.

    0.17 secs: “I can’t control the weather.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezbhVrb7zMs

    31

    • #
      sophocles

      At around 5pm, these panels are next to useless,” Paul McArdle, chief executive of energy software firm, Global-Roam, said.”

      ROTFL.
      Oh, darn! Somebody’s spotted it! :-)

      Mr. McArdle has definitely missed his calling in life: he should have been a stand-up comedian. :-)
      But, despite that, he does make a very good point—a valid and most excellent point—one not to be dismissed; he has to be conceded that.

      Perhaps, just perhaps, it’s a small possibility, but just maybe, it’s because, at this time of the year, the sun is setting about 5 – 6pm. I’ve always believed that the Solar in the name Solar Panels has to do with the Sun and I don’t think I’m wrong.

      The logical corollary is that Solar panels won’t work at all well as lunar panels or someone would have found out by now. But then the moon is even more aberrant than the sun; it’s only full for around three days per month, not every day.

      And both the sun and the moon do terribly when the sky is clouded over.

      Mr McArdle, with that observation, has, whether intentionally or not, placed his finger firmly and accurately on the truth of the matter, the bit all the Pollies keep missing. He should be listened to. Carefully, because someone with his obvious intelligence and powers of observation appears only once in a lifetime:

      Photo Voltaic panels, no matter what their orientation, don’t work in the dark. Why? Because there is no Photo for them to be Voltaic. That’s the way it is.

      Somebody should deliver a truckload of coal to his front lawn and top the pile with a BIG sign so that all can see it:

      COAL: Captured and Sequestered Sun Shine. Ideal for generating electricity 24 x 7.
      (CO2 doesn’t need to be mentioned … )

      </sarc>

      220

      • #
        WXcycles

        If you want to maximise your efficiency make sure the blue side is pointing up, amazing how many dodgy panel manufacturers omit this.

        10

    • #
      Eugene S Conlin

      Coal miners to blame for Queensland floods

      Does this mean that wind and solar plants to blame for droughts?
      ;)

      10

  • #
    manalive

    ‘The death of coal has been greatly exaggerated …’ (apologies to Mark Twain).
    In Australia coal isn’t dying a natural death, it’s being slowly strangled.

    110

  • #
    yarpos

    The Super Funds , particularly the industry funds, have also drunk the AGW Kool Aid. The are continually trumpeting how morally pure they are and how they are saving the planet. Those that still support direct investment in shares still havent censored coaland gas stocks so there is a work around.

    70

  • #
    TdeF

    It hardly matters which is larger from a CO2 point of view. Turning Iron ore into steel requires coal to reduce the Fe2O3 into Fe by releasing CO2. This despite the appalling ignorance of Richard Di Natalie who said Whyalla could keep making steel as long as they do not use coal? How is it that General Practicioners like Di Natlie and Bob Brown know no basic schoolboy science?

    What is so obvious about this war on CO2 is that it is all deceitful. CO2 is called ‘emissions’. Carbon taxes are called ‘subsidies’. Coal is singled out from gas, diesel, petrol, oil when the chemical reaction is identical. Only the density changes with different forms of CH2.

    As Dr. Patrick Moore in his book Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout, he only ever met one Green with any science knowledge.

    So the war on coal is a war on emissions is a war on Carbon Dioxide but it is fine with the Greens to replace clean coal power generation with diesel? It is fine to replace petrol burning cars with electric cars when electric cars generate far more CO2?

    The core absurdity in man made Global Warming is that we humans have increased CO2 levels 50% since 1900.
    If the CO2 increase is natural, why this war on coal?

    Simple measurement shows that the CO2 increase is not man made. Radio Carbon dating, the essential tool of archeology is essentially dating CO2. The amount of man made CO2 in the air is under 2%. So let’s cripple the country say the Greens and stop coal exports. Iron ore is fine though. Apparently.

    260

    • #
      TdeF

      The use of the prejudicial word ‘emissions’ to describe Carbon Dioxide is a favorite of all the proponents of Carbon (Dioxide) Tax. This is a group term for environmentally harmful output from industrial process.

      It rankles as the very essence of deceit as the proponents (say Malcolm Turnbull) know that Carbon Dioxide is not a harmful ‘emission’. He is generating 3 tons a year of CO2 himself, just sitting in parliament. Then all the animals of the world, including the fish and whales and crabs and ants. To declare Carbon Dioxide a harmful ‘emission’ is a deliberate categorization of a harmless, tiny gas as a terrible pollutant.

      So do not play the game. There are no dangerous ‘emissions’. There is only Carbon Dioxide.
      There is almost no man made Carbon Dioxide in the air and half of all CO2 cycles through the oceans every 14 years.

      Now we are told we cannot afford to build new power stations (Australian, this morning) and we are stuck with the world’s highest electricity prices. That does not make sense.

      Why are we forcing working coal power stations to close (Liddell) with punitive regulations and taxes on CO2?

      Why do we taxpayers have to pay billions for another interconnector for wind driven ideal South Australia so they can get more coal power?

      Why are we paying billions for Snowy II just to buy and store unreliable private wind power?

      What is so wrong with coal? The hypocrisy of politicians is only exceeded by their ignorance.

      220

      • #
        Reed Coray

        TdeF, the use of prejudicial and misleading words/phrases like “emissions” is rampant in the global warming community. For example, “tipping point,” “greenhouse gas,” “catastrophic,” “AGW caused species extinction,” and my personal favorite: “heat-trapping” as in CO2 is a heat-trapping gas. As I’ve claimed many times on this blog (and as far as I know, no one has even tried to refute my claim much less successfully refuted it): “heat cannot be trapped.” If it’s true that heat cannot be trapped, then logic dictates that no substance, including CO2, can be a “heat-trapping substance.” Any and all uses of the phrase “CO2 is a heat-trapping gas” come either from ignorance or an attempt to mislead.

        101

    • #
      sophocles

      TdeF alleged:

      The core absurdity in man made Global Warming is that we humans have increased CO2 levels 50% since 1900.

      Sorry TdeF, but I disagree with your figure: it’s somewhat larger than reality. We have increased the CO2 levels way less than that.

      Human additions to the planet’s annual CO2 increment have been only around 3.7% pa. +/- over this last warming period. The balance has come from other sources, most esp. out-gassing by warming oceanic surface waters (eg: the Gulf Stream). (From skepticalscience.com (*cough *splutter *choke… hey! I’ve actually found something useful at that website! Wonder of wonders … :-) ) human contributions to the atmospheric CO2 are c. 29GT (gigatonnes) pa with overall CO2 from all sources of c. 780GT which makes the human contribution of 3.7%. pa.

      Now, that’s a website even Professor de Havilland recommends: It Must Be Right!

      That website attributes the overall 40% increase over the last 50 years to the accumulation of that annual small human generated content. I have issues with that, too. They (the Skientists) say such an increase should have taken 5,000 – 20,000 years. 20,000 years ago was the coldest time of the last glaciation and the seas had absorbed so much CO2, the atmospheric content was 190ppmv. The plants die at 150ppmv so the planet came close to disaster.

      The disappearance of all but a trace of the isotopes in the atmosphere produced by atomic bomb testing has been quite dramatic since the last tests in the early 1960s, which strongly suggests a half life of CO2 of only 14 years, not the larger figure. The greening of the planet also suggests the biosphere is taking up more CO2, more quickly than the Skientists reckon. So the figure of 40% and a remanance of over 5000 years is disputable, further lowering the anthropogenic added proportion even more.

      CO2 lags temperature on both short [~1-2 year] and long [~1000 year] time scales
      The IPCC claim that “All of the increases [in CO2 concentrations since pre-industrial times] are caused by human activity” is impossible

      [Murry Salby] so the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is not from accumulation of the small anthropogenic content. Salby makes the point that it’s a dynamic, not a static system.

      80

      • #
        Tdef

        The assertion that the 50% increase is man made is the basis of all man made global warming. This is factually wrong. That is real science. No other argument matters. That is why I persist.

        I think you are furiously agrreing.

        90

        • #
          sophocles

          I read it again, and re-read your other posts which led into this a second time, as well, a lot more carefully (I skim read a lot and it sometimes gets me into trouble) and you are correct! I am agreeing furiously!

          Thanks for the courtesy :-)

          50

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I used to wonder how educated people could go off the rails..then you see doctors and engineers being recruited for ISIS and other radical outfits. Education is no guarantee of logical thought, not when a radical belief system is in play….

      Now ponder the siren call of the greens…..I also think there is a bit o prestige and “I am I am” kudos at play too.

      The Devil hands out trinkets of power and glory like lollies, which supplies him with a long line of willing but educated fools…

      50

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        I should also point out that if you’re quickly willing to sell your soul for the vapour/mirage of money and power, it also means they would sacrifice those under them into the meat mincer of the fray ( i.e. us ) just as quickly…..

        It reminds me of the dumb officers in WW1, who were donkeys of men presiding over lions of soldiers….

        40

        • #
          sophocles

          Original Steve was reminded of the dumb officers in WW1 …
          I guess Greek and Latin at Higher Institutions of Learning were considered ideal for preparing these offissahs for the role of commanding men during the Phases of War.

          I can totally understand the relevance of translating “Take up your spears! Ready your shields! Saddle the horses! Drink the last of your wine! Fate awaits us, soldiers!” into English from its original Ancient Greek (or back into that language), especially when their men were facing barbed wire and machine guns. Highly relevant, indeed. Brings a whole new meaning to “Stiff upper lip” and “prat.”

          (The Anzac officers were not popular with their British Army counterparts. They understood their men and the demands made of them.)

          30

  • #
    DaveR

    We’ve only got 300 years of these kind of coal profits to go

    Thats based on current coal reserves only. Reserves are that portion of the larger resources envelope that have been fully proved up for production. In time, and when needed, more resources will be proved up to reserves.

    The likely total figure is more like 1,000 years.

    110

    • #
      Bobl

      In Australia we have barely started prospecting and most of the arid region has seen no testing at all, my guess is 3000-5000 years of the stuff.

      90

  • #
    steve

    This may seem like a ridiculous question as I am not an economist but why are the four Australian banks the only ones that can finance a coal mine? There are thousands of other banks in the world from countries that like coal

    60

    • #
      TdeF

      Sovereign risk.

      Look at the purchase of Hazelwood from the Victorian governement. $2.5Billion and a 40 year lease. Then the Fedeal government stepped in six years later and made them uneconomical by requiring people bought wind power every time they wanted coal power, making coal unaffordable.

      The last straw was Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews tripling the price of coal to force them to close. He didn’t want the money, just the closure. So the owners walked away from the last 20 years for which they had paid. Now they are supposed to pay $1.6Bn to clean up the area. Who would invest in Australia?

      Adani is trying to invest and our wonderful politicians hate Carbon Dioxide and our Prime Minister wants to pump water uphill at our expense for private investors, like himself. The smart money is on wind and solar, no matter how useless it is. Carbon Dioxide trading. ‘Emissions’ intensity. That’s where the free money is.

      Who but an Australian bank could finance a coal mine hated by our press and thus by our politicians? Now what Australian bank would? What is good for Australia and Australians has nothing to do with it.

      You cannot have coal power if you are a democracy because the good of the people is only served by a socialist or communist government. Worldwide they have no restrictions on coal. As it should be say our communist universities. The ANTIFA are rioting in Portland against the very idea of freedom of speech. Just like the brownshirts before them.

      180

      • #
        TdeF

        From my reading, Energie invested a further $1.5Bn in maintenance, scrubbers, improvements to make a reliable, ultra clean power station apart from the allegation that CO2 is somehow ‘dirty’. Closing Hazelwood was a tragedy but forcing it to close was robbing Energie who were under the clear understanding that a 40 year lease was a 40 year lease. Who would trust an Australian government now?

        100

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          No one.

          Moving overseas is looking attractive as Australia spirals downward….we’ve moved from First World to a North Korea/California/Venezuela disfunctional level.

          Alms for a lepper…?

          40

          • #
            Latus Dextro

            Mate, you’ve nothing on the current communist PM of NZ, who advocates “zero carbon” by 2050, and her globalist counterpoint across the aisle who agrees. They consider a 25% shrinkage of the NZ economy, loss of dairy and beef production (CH4) as acceptable price to pay to save the planet virtue signal their effing insanity.

            Such political criminals should be tried for treason. Custodians of economic security and prosperity, they are the very ruination of prosperity and destruction of civilised society. They are also either very stupid or as ideologues, cunning and machiavellian, but not both. Treason may be applied to both. In both cases, they will be presiding over their own demise.

            80

            • #
              sophocles

              [SNIP. Better left unsaid. - Jo]

              It’s possible the zero carbon by 2050 is from James “Cat-6″ Shaw’s office. He has the “True Religion” and is Minister for Climate Change. (That’s one office I would be pleased to see abolished.) As PM, Ardern has to accept, or at least listen to, the advice of her Ministers.

              I’m a little surprised Simon Bridges is that gullible, but then he’s a lawyer from Auckland and Oxford Universities with some time at the London School of Economics. Lawyers, like Obama, seem to show high levels of credulity for some forms of propaganda.

              “Decarbonising the economy” is not something to look forward to. It means an attempt to move to EV’s involuntarily. The Germans have discovered that EVs are a swindle and a recent TV program there labelled them “ Climate Killers. This Notrickszone article gives the details. It claims the emissions from making one Tesla battery exceed those an equivalent (?) ICE powered car would emit over about 200,000 kms worth of petrol. I shudder to think what the roads here would be like with EV’s. I can imagine the queues at charging points on both sides of the Kaimais to get over them.

              I cannot see any benefits from “decarbonising” our economy, nor why it should be important given our emissions must be among the smallest in the world (c. 0.13% or thereabouts). Methane is running at about 1000 ppbv (parts per billion). That’s tiny and not even worth considering: I can’t see abolishing our cattle herd having any effect on that, but the bureaucratic mind is never practical nor realistic. It completely lacks any sense of proportion.

              With 1600 coal burning power stations slated to be built in India, China, Indonesia, Viet Nam and elsewhere, why should we bother? Any savings we make will be completely obliterated. Swamped and Overwhelmed.

              Einstein was right when he said there were only “ two things which are infinite, human stupidity and the universe, and I’m not sure about the latter.

              Besides, we shouldn’t be worrying about the climate but preparing to get through the nearing magnetic pole swap with as little damage as possible.

              10

              • #
                Owen Brown

                Thank god – I thought I was the only one who did not believe the climate change hype. Congratulations and keep chipping away

                00

    • #
      Rob Leviston

      The current energy policy precludes the building of any power plant, other than those that are seen to be RE. That is why the banks will not finance a coal plant.
      Once the folly of trying to supply our energy needs, from ambient energy sources, and energy policy changes, then the banks will be able to finance coal/gas/nuclear power once more!
      But, have we left it too late?
      We currently have enough coal/gas/hydro to supply pretty much 100% of our needs currently.
      The favored energy sources, wind and solar, really provide bugger all, despite the billions of dollars thrown at them!
      Maybe, just maybe, the Monash Forum is our only political hope in this current climate. A revamped NEG, or whatever it is called, must include the willingness to build some baseload coal power!

      40

  • #
    David Maddison

    As I pointed out in another thread Australia exports enough coal that if it were all burned for electricity (rather than used for steel production) it would produce a constant 72GW of electricity.

    If CO2 from coal is so bad that Australia has some of the world’s most expensive electricity why is Australia exporting so much of it to produce CO2 elsewhere?

    131

    • #
      TdeF

      At a rough guess the iron ore we export produces twice as much CO2.

      90

    • #
      PeterS

      David CO2 is bad for Australia because it provides too many good benefits for the continuation of our traditional Western values. The nation by and large has been taken over by the extreme left who are anti-West and the public by and large either don’t care or are in agreement with the national agenda to stop using coal fired power and rely on renewables as much as possible. That’s the ideology in both major parties, many big businesses and our education institutions. It has gone too far to be reversed by any single individual or party. People like Abbott and Cory although saying the right things will have no impact. Very few are listening and too many despise them. There is only now one way to reverse this trend – the hard way with a crash and burn.

      100

      • #
        TdeF

        No one is listening? Whenever Abbott says anything, it is front page news. Malcolm hates this.
        Too many despise them? What, Cory and Abbott? Who says that? Have you been talking to Malcolm?

        52

      • #
        Rob Leviston

        The ‘hijacked’ NEG, has been voted down by the Nationals. Someone is listening!

        31

  • #
    Lance

    Apparently, there are several power plants for sale in India.
    Some 6500 MW of capacity.
    It seems they were without firm PPAs and their allocations of coal were “rescinded”, so the projects are now surplus and the investors bailing out. A good price might be had for them.

    Article:

    http://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-bankers-put-6500-mw-power-plants-on-sale-2627831

    60

  • #
    Robber

    Interesting reference from Pat over the weekend about a Grattan Institute report: “Mostly Working: Australia’s wholesale electricity market” Well worth reading their analysis.
    Among the findings:
    – Wholesale electricity prices rose across Australia’s National Electricity Market (NEM) by 130 per cent between 2015 and 2017. The value of electricity traded in the NEM more than doubled, from about $8 billion to $18 billion.
    – Three issues caused the price increases. First, two big, old, coal-fired power stations closed (Northern in South Australia in 2016 and Hazelwood in Victoria in 2017) – estimated impact $6 billion. Second, the price of key inputs, especially gas and black coal, rose just when the plants they fuel were needed more often – estimated impact $4 billion. The third issue is that generators ‘game’ the system: they use their power in concentrated markets to create scarcity of supply and so force prices up – guesstimate $800 million. While about $4 billion of this increased revenue was needed to pay for increased fuel costs, the remaining $6 billion appears to have flowed to generators.
    – Additional, subsidised renewable supply could put some downward pressure on prices, but this will be transitory because the ‘intermittency’ of wind and solar energy will ultimately have to be paid for. This is not good news, but politicians should be honest with consumers about the harsh truth: higher wholesale electricity prices are the new normal.
    Recommendations:
    – Facilitate investment by providing stable policy
    – Ease input cost pressures by lifting the current moratoria on gas exploration
    – Be honest with consumers about prices (are you listening Minister Frydenberg?)
    – Stop price gaming
    – Monitor market concentration

    When a generator with high marginal costs sets the price, all other generators benefit from additional revenue. So, in 2015 when a gas generator was setting the price, all generators were getting about $50 a megawatt hour. But in 2017, after gas costs had increased, when a gas generator was setting the price, all generators were receiving about $100 a megawatt hour even if their own costs had not increased.

    In Fig 4.4 they cite 2020 costs of generation that are similar to Dr Finkel’s report:
    Wind $90/MWhr (no storage)
    Solar with storage $140-170/MWhr
    Gas $85/MWhr ($125 for open cycle)
    Coal $80/MWhr
    The intermittent nature of wind and solar energy means that additional, dispatchable generation is needed to balance the market when wind or solar is unavailable. Firming capacity includes gas generation, batteries and pumped hydro. The best estimates are that firming costs will equate to between $25 and $30 per megawatt hour extra.
    As Australia closes its old power stations and moves to a low-carbon electricity system, it is going to need to build a lot of expensive infrastructure – both generation and transmission. And ultimately consumers will have to pay for it.

    The ACCC was supposed to report to the Treasurer on electricity prices by June 30, so stay tuned.

    110

    • #
      TdeF

      “two big, old, coal-fired power stations closed”. The steel Sydney Harbour bridge is much older. Even the Sydney Opera house. However even Alan Kohler admitted that like a factory, a power station which is maintained can last forever. Both closures were forced by the RET, that a 4c kw/hr coal power station cannot compete with 9c kw/hr wind. Explain that and you understand the purpose of the RET.

      Then there is a contradiction the Grattan Institute studiously avoids. If we have the world’s highest power prices and you can still generate power for 4c kw/hr from essentially free coal, why wouldn’t anyone build lots of coal power stations?

      As for “Coal $80/MWhr”, who said? Finkel? That is the effective pricing after the retailer pays your opposition too. Legislated extortion.

      160

      • #
        TdeF

        Besides, show me a windmill which is going to last as long as a coal power station. In fact show me one which is serviceable and not disposable. Or a solar farm.

        110

        • #
          David Maddison

          All of the calculations for the unreliables have been based on unrealistically long service lives for them. They treat them as though they are real power stations, not unreliable disposables. By 2030 when Australia has to meet a certain infiltration of unreliables, all existing unreliables will be beyond their actual real service life.

          130

          • #

            “all existing unreliables will be beyond their actual real service life.” That or the real and large maintenance cost will be obvious. As will the piles and piles of dead things needing to be recycled and or the fields of messy looking failed crap.

            70

            • #
              OriginalSteve

              Maybe make it law all wind farm company directors have to publish their residential addresses….that would slow things down a bit…. it wont happen, but it would have the desired affect.

              20

        • #
          Rob Leviston

          The solar farm they built at Ballarat, didn’t last very long at all! Don’t know when it stopped functioning, but it was only built in 2009! Now, no-one wants to know about it!

          30

        • #
          James in Melbourne

          TDeF,
          I for one would be very grateful if you could furnish a short summary of the LGC timeframe/lifeycle, to show how an LGC is created, paid for, accounted for, and finally surrendered/extinguished.
          Thanks in anticipation.

          00

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        TdeF:

        There are 3 problems with the existing system.
        Firstly that renewables get a subsidy through the RET (which is added to the RETAIL bills to hide it)
        Secondly that renewables have preferred access to the market.
        Thirdly, that conventional generators have to bear the costs of backup (reduced market share with minimal reduction in cost).

        Solution? Simples! Get rid of the RET and subsidy and make supply contracts enforceable (i.e. you must suply at your bid price).

        The result will be that coal fired will be cheapest, now and even until 2030 (according to Finkel).

        150

        • #
          Tdef

          Precisely. I am going to ask Tony Abbott to do that on Tuesday night. He is an economist too. In what free market is the cheapest and biggest supplier forced to close?

          100

        • #
          RickWill

          All wind generators have standing bids at large negative prices to ensure they get scheduling priority when they are producing. There are times in SA now when they are required to constrain output as there is not enough local load and the Vic connection is maxed out. That occurred often last month:
          https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNgwiVrN07whX1KopI
          The current cap is around 1300MW. There is 1810MW of wind capacity in SA.

          If the Vic link did not exist the cap would be 600MW lower. Curtailment would be a regular feature of the SA market and the achieved capacity factor much lower than the unconstrained value. It is impossible for wind to get higher market share than 30% without significant storage in the system. Looking just at the SA wind generation in June, it would take 1,100 HPRs to even out the power flow from the SA wind generators. Average is around 700MW from the 1810MW installed.

          SA is lobbying hard for a higher capacity link to NSW so they can infect that state with their intermittency as they have done to Victoria. It improves security in SA as well removing the generation constraint. The cost will be high for NSW consumers as it will guarantee closure of Liddell and wholesale prices will ratchet up another 20 to 30%.

          60

    • #
      Bobl

      Double to quadruple the snowy II costs, not only does the estimate not include a bunch of stuff like say profit margin, but when was the last time the government brought anything like this under budget? Think NBN folks.

      Snowy II should be about increasing the dam capacity and adding turbines, that would actually create new generation capacity, instead we have this useless “greens approved” battery proposal that wastes 20% or more of the energy stored into it! My guess is usable recovery will be about 50% so frankly the selling price needs to be at least double the buying price before amortisation costs are even discussed. It’ll be built and like the desalination plants rarely if ever used.

      101

      • #
        David Maddison

        And I am willing to bet coal power will be used to pump water uphill for the Snowy II battery.

        101

      • #
        David Maddison

        I think the Sheeple and politicians think that Snowy Hydro II is new generation and not just a Big Battery.

        72

        • #
          TdeF

          I’m willing to bet that Malcolm Turnbull has no idea of conservation of energy. He is simply not a conservative.

          80

  • #
    Ruairi

    Australia’s big banks don’t think twice,
    About asking the Greens for advice,
    The right group to trust,
    To turn boom into bust,
    As they live in a fool’s paradise.

    170

    • #
      Dennis

      Easier to milk consumers via superannuation, insurance and banking smokescreens and mirrors.

      60

    • #
      Lance

      In Oz the power was stable,
      ’til the thieves took a seat at the table.
      With sunshine and wind, they went round the bend.
      Now the jobs and economy rend.

      Apologies. I’m new to this. :)

      120

      • #
        Annie

        A good start…last line needs polishing!

        ‘New jobs for the country a fable’?

        41

        • #
          Lance

          Or:

          A reliable grid’s now a fable.

          :) Cheers. I’ll get it right, someday.

          60

          • #
            Annie

            That’s good Lance…I like it.

            51

            • #
              Lance

              I once met a man from McSparta,
              And he was a champion farter.
              On one pinto bean, he could play “God Save The Queen”
              Or power most of the lights in Victoria.

              Apologies. :) Isn’t Gin wonderful?

              80

              • #
                glen Michel

                Scotch can make you drowsy and Gin can make you think.{..and a common cold can Kill you, but my good woman turned me to drink}- Rory Gallagher,Irish blues legend 1971

                20

    • #
      PeterS

      I actually worked recently at one of the big banks as a contractor and it really felt I was working at the HQ of the Greens Party. I’m not kidding.

      120

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        One must sign up for The Cause to get a guernsey…..presumably most of the bankers were brainwashed 20/30 somethings?

        20

  • #
    Hivemind

    Not supporting Adani was an easy decision for Australia’s “big four”. None of them are big enough to fund such a large investment, so meaningless virtue signalling was the only decision they could actually make.

    50

  • #
    Mark M

    There are currently 273 gigawatts of coal capacity under construction around the world, and another 570 gigawatts in the pipeline, the UN says.

    That would represent a 42% increase in global energy production from coal.

    The UN Admits That The Paris Climate Deal Was A Fraud

    https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-un-admits-that-the-paris-climate-deal-was-a-fraud/

    The Paris agreement does not change this.

    Over 2,400 coal-fired power plants are under construction or being planned around the world, but not in the United States, thanks to President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its onerous regulations.

    China is building 368 coal-fired power plants and planning a further 803 and India is building 297 and planning 149.

    Together these two countries are building or planning to build two-thirds of the coal-fired plants planned worldwide over the next 15 years. (See chart below.)

    http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/coal-will-remain-a-major-global-generating-fuel-particularly-in-china/

    40

    • #
      TdeF

      That’s 15x as big as the entire of Australia. New coal energy. So we shut ours down? Why?

      60

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Coz we’re stupid and let the leftists destroy the country.

        We get the govt we deserve. And oh boy, right when “She’ll be right” shoudl apply, its no longer good enough when you have collusion between big biz, big govt and big green and the UN…..

        50

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    A post that many should read.

    And by many, I mean miners of coal and anyone who’s livelihood is supported by coal.

    While only short it carries the essentials;

    1. Coal is going to be available for a long time here in Australia.

    2. The World, outside of Australia, shows an increasing need for coal.

    3. There are big players, the financiers, who are being squeezed by the Moral Majority into denying funding for what would appear to be a very safe bet for any bank.

    4. There’s an implied social need that is shown up by the post. Since the banks and miners are being harassed by people, on the loose, it would be sensible to give those “activists” something to think about.

    The government is responsible for the health and well-being of all citizens.
    It’s number one obligation is to find work for those people.

    They could find government sponsored work on many socially beneficial projects.

    They would be especially keen to join these if the dole was stopped or at least cut in half.

    One of the most appalling displays of green arrogance I have seen or could imagine, was a Green Mobbing of one of the big four banks in a local suburb.

    Staff had to deal with 15 of these members of the Moral Majority invading the bank yelling and waving placards.

    People are entitled to demonstrate in Australia but it has been a right that has been used and abused.

    The Green Monster is answerable to no-one, especially the Australian people.

    The Green Monster has the Horns of the Devil and needs to be put in it’s place.

    KK

    80

    • #
      Annie

      Evil is that which goes against the common good.

      81

    • #
      Dennis

      The Australian (red) Greens are considered by international Greens to be was out to the left from greenism generally.

      However, Labor and Green in Australia are hand in hand on many issues.

      80

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        You forgot the ( alleged ) Liberal party….

        People laughed when I said the evidence pointed to John Howard being a Socialist, but now the reality is clear….

        50

  • #
    Rupert Ashford

    …and for those saying “leave the stuff in the ground” I need to know “what of your government freebies are you willing to forego to show how serious you are”…

    90

    • #
      ando

      and when are they going to forego heating/cooling their homes, not using any products/services that involves or involved the generation of so called co2 ‘emissions’?
      Until the hysterics and gullible take the step of eliminating their own ‘co2 footprint’ and forgo all the luxuries western civilization has afforded them, it’s safe to assume they are full of the stinky brown stuff and deep down don’t actually think there is a problem.
      I can’t stomach the hypocrisy any more.

      00

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    This is dangerous territory…they best not start messing with my freshly brewed double espresso…..

    Footprint reduction? Bite me….

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-02/coffee-carbon-footprint/9930180

    “Drinking coffee makes many of us feel good, so it makes sense that we would want to feel good about how it is produced.

    When it comes to sustainable coffee, the most important choice is how the coffee has been cultivated, and its impact on the ecosystems where it is grown. But you may not realise that how you prepare your coffee at home can add 50 per cent or more to its overall environmental footprint.

    Australians’ appreciation of coffee has changed beyond recognition over the past couple of decades, yet many households still have a jar of instant coffee in the kitchen. We’re not the only ones — roughly half the world’s countries have significant instant coffee markets and the global market is growing.

    To figure out a product’s overall environmental impact — at every stage from production, to shipping, to consumption — researchers use a method called “life cycle assessment”. This method has been used to calculate the footprint of everything from running shoes to biofuels.

    Coffee is a classic candidate for life cycle assessments, because there are so many different options to compare. You might think that instant coffee is the most processed of coffee products and therefore a less sustainable choice, but appearances can be deceptive.”

    50

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      I wonder if a “life cycle assessment” has been done on;

      1. Wind turbine electricity generators,
      and
      2. Solar PV generation.

      But, no, that would be dangerous for the cause.

      KK

      30

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Uh oh….shhhh…..

    https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/

    “Don’t Tell Anyone, But We Just Had Two Years Of Record-Breaking Global Cooling

    Inconvenient Science: NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Not that you’d know it, since that wasn’t deemed news. Does that make NASA a global warming denier?

    Writing in Real Clear Markets, Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, “global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius.” That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.

    “The 2016-2018 Big Chill,” he writes, “was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average.”

    70

    • #
      TdeF

      As predicted by Prof Weiss, on cue. 8:40 into the video.

      40

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      NASA a global cooling denier. More like it I’d say.
      GeoffW

      50

    • #
      sophocles

      … and one more year with the cooling we’ve had so far, and there goes all the Global Warming, the whole lot, every skerrick. Gone. Disappeared. Out the window. Nothing to worry about any more. All done, in just three years.

      Wonderful. We can stop mucking around with these blasted windmills and the PV cells. We can go back to building honest power stations because there will no longer be any CAGW left to fix.

      Calloo, callay, my beamish boys and girls. The climate will be back to “normal.” Even though all that extra CO2 which was supposed to cause it won’t have gone away.

      50

      • #
        TdeF

        There is too much to lose! Think how many millions of people are employed directly and indirectly by Climate Change. Think how many universities have degree courses in climate change, how many councils and government have departments? What about Clean Energy? CO2 is dirty. Subsidies. People employed in the windmill industry. Oh, the humanity!

        97% of all ‘Scientists’ will come up with a reason carbon dioxide is now causing cooling which will require a huge expense, more carbon dioxide taxes and the shutting down of Western democracies. The call will be ‘the Science is in’. Again. The logic will be something like Carbon Dioxide causes warming which causes cooling. Also there will be a great discovery that the way they have been measuring world temperature is wrong. Warming causes cooling causes fewer storms. There is just too much to lose. Think of the polar bears, frozen to death.

        The problem is that Carbon Dioxide is the enemy of the people. People are the problem. Get rid of the people and the planet will be saved, but for whom?

        40

        • #
          sophocles

          There’s a lot more to lose than some Global Warming classes, a few academics with their fur ruffled. Cookie Boy will have to suspend his open course at Queensland U and that will be a big improvement on the educational landscape. Another Propaganda Purveyor down. May that happen soonest!

          97% of all ‘Scientists’ will come up with a reason carbon dioxide is now causing cooling which will require a huge expense, more carbon dioxide taxes and the shutting down of Western democracies.

          I was waiting for that figure to come from someone or somewhere :-) Hey, you didn’t invoke “Think of the Children!” Tch. So I will and say that I am thinking of them by staying factual. They deserve that.

          So: Cooling causes storms and bad weather. Not warming. Warming smooths the temperature gradient between the tropics and the pole out so it’s not so turbulent and the weather is calmer. Cooling on the other hand brings bigger, badder storms. From documented medieval history:

          At the start of the little Ice Age, the North sea was hit by a series of storm tides. One of the most infamous was “Das Grote Mandrenke” in 1362 – the great drowner of men.

          That toll was huge for the time. Now it rates alongside Britain’s modern cull of its old age pensioner population every winter through its electricity prices.

          The Zuider Zee in Holland was engineered by storms:

          the mouth and size of the inlet were much widened in the 12th century and especially after a disastrous flood in 1282 [1] broke through the barrier dunes near Texel. The disaster marked the rise of Amsterdam on the southwestern end of the bay…

          The even more massive St. Lucia’s flood occurred 14 December 1287, when the seawalls broke during a storm, killing approximately 50,000 to 80,000 people in the fifth largest flood in recorded history. The name “Zuiderzee” came into general usage around this period.

          Other big storms had strong effects:

          in 1436 the first flood of “All Saints” hit the coast, which caused the Cathedral of Schleswig to apply for help in Basel, which at that time housed the Concilium Basiliense. The argument was that 60 parishes had been lost to the sea.

          There are more, but for now, I rest my case.

          What we should be focusing on is how to survive the impending magnetic pole swap. The planet’s magnetic field is our first line of defence and with a pole swap impending along with an extended Solar Minimum, I don’t think we can afford to be distracted by inconsequential “decarbonising of the economy.” Survival is more urgent. So we can afford to dismantle (=defund) the Climate Change dilettantes, industries and all. Let’s get on with it.

          20

      • #
        Rob Leviston

        And our plucky Canberrians have been experiencing some of that nice global warming, change, cooling! Apparently the coldest since 1965!
        But, they didn’t listen in 2012, https://australianclimatemadness.com/2012/07/09/canberras-coldest-mornings-since-1965/
        So, in 2018, it got colder again! I did find a reference for a low of 8.7C, but for the report I read just last week? Ah Google! What are you doing? Guess it doesn’t fit the narrative! But I did see string of temps below -5C?

        10

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Says it all . .
    Screwed Parliament, screwed government and screwed nation.
    GeoffW

    50

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      The situation here in Australia, whereby we, the Parliament, the government and the people of this country are perfectly happy to sell off our coal to anybody in the world to use freely, but at the same time, choose not to use it ourselves because of the ‘pollution’ caused to the world climate.
      It makes no sense. This double set of values must rank as one the greatest cases of bigotry, self deceit, and hypocrisy that one could ever imagine. If the powers to be in this country will not allow coal to be burned here in Australia, then they should not be exporting it overseas for others to burn and pollute.
      GeoffW

      100

  • #
    David Maddison

    It seems that from any rational perspective neither Australian federal, state or local governments seem capable of making any sound governance decisions.

    In fact I’m struggling to think of any recent example where something has been done right.

    50

  • #
    pat

    Robber has posted a link (comment #14) to the latest Grattan Institute report which admits –

    #1 reason for increased cost of electricity is shutting down of coal-fired power stations;

    #2 reason is related to closing them down.

    #3 reason is generators gaming the system.

    no surprise then that ABC Brisbane this morning ONLY focuses on #3 reason in their extensive coverage of the “Coal is King” story. (of course, ABC presenters are absolutely forbidden to express their personal opinions – lol).

    from 2hr18min35sec to 3hr05mins40secs (with short traffic & news breaks):

    AUDIO: 2 Jul: ABC Brisbane Breakfast
    with Craig Zonca & Rachel Mealey (standing in for regular presenter)
    http://www.abc.net.au/radio/brisbane/programs/breakfast/breakfast/9909290

    rough notes:

    Federal Resources Minister, Matt Canavan. coal – $60 billion the year just ended. might drop a little in the coming year. Zonca wants to get on to “renewables” early on. keeps it up despite the fantastic worldwide figures Canavan quotes. Zonca pushes division in LNP over coal/renewables.
    ABC’s Rachel Mealey chimes in – not happy Canavan is saying “coal is king”. she asks isn’t that a blinkered approach defending coal just because of financial windfall. brings up pro-NEG Nat’l Farmers’Fed president Fiona Simpson from Guardian article.

    Zonca says Qld Energy Minister Anthony Lynham has been listening in to Sen Matt Canavan.
    ABC’s Zonca – do you agree – is coal king in your life?
    Lynham: we have to get the balance right. renewables projects are coming along passionately. 50% renewable target by 2030 is something the Qld Govt holds dearly.
    I have renewable power companies lining up here in Qld to put renewable power projects in, and what have I heard from any coal-fired power plant operators? none. no-one wants to set one up in Qld, but the queues are out the door for renewable power projects, because it is efficient power. it’s clean power. it’s what Queenslanders want, and we can drive down our power prices by bringing on more supplies of renewable power.
    we’ll always have a strong coal industry. world produces 8,000 million tonnes of coal annually, Australia produces around 200-300 million tonnes.

    ABC’s Mealey brings up Grattan report.
    naturally, she only brings up point #3 – re power generators gaming the system to create artificial scarcity. Lynham defends.

    Zonca reads responses from listeners. first, suggests Zonca read up on the hundreds of coal-fired power plants being built around the world; second says Canavan should come out of the past into the future (of renewables).
    Zonca: Grattan says power generators are gaming the system. what blame rests with them? will be speaking to them after the news.

    Listener call: if it’s good to export coal, might as well export asbestos.
    Zonca to Mealey: what about Japan where you have lived?
    Meeley: post Fukushima, back to coal. Tokyo doesn’t have air pollution because of nuclear.
    Zonca: goodness gracious.
    Listener text: mentions 100-plus coal-fired power plants being built worldwide. Zonca says he must try to find some information on that.

    Zonca: who’s to blame? Tony Wood, Grattan Institute: plenty of blame to go around. no mention of shutting down of coal-fired power stations causing increase. indeed, no mention of coal at all.

    NOTE: the Grattan Report doesn’t recommend building any coal-fired power plants. LOL.

    30

    • #
      TdeF

      “#1 reason for increased cost of electricity is shutting down of coal-fired power stations;”

      This is facetious. The #1 reason is the reason the coal fired power stations shut down. Unprofitable. With by far the cheapest power, nothing to build, nothing to invest and fundamentally a resources as cheap as the wind and half the price? The reason is the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000. The infamous RET.

      Specifically
      (2) Despite subsection (1), the following energy sources are not eligible renewable energy sources:
      (a) fossil fuels;
      (b) materials or waste products derived from fossil fuels.
      and

      This is done through the issuing of certificates for the generation of
      electricity using eligible renewable energy sources and requiring
      certain purchasers (called liable entities) to surrender a specified
      number of certificates for the electricity that they acquire during a
      year.

      30

  • #
    Robber

    Why do we keep getting “told” that coal (and gas) have no future for electricity generation?
    Because believers believe that burning carbon is bad because it will cause catastrophic global warming. So governments set targets to increase intermittent wind/solar generation.
    Then why isn’t there the same passion to stop burning carbon in diesel trains and trucks, and in jet fuel powered planes, and in petrol/diesel cars, and in gas heated buildings and houses?
    Perhaps that would mean shifting from virtue signalling to actually curtailing lifestyles?
    Although, according to Andrew Bolte, SBS is running a reckless commercial in this very cold winter urging the elderly to turn off their heating to save the planet from global warming.
    We also keep getting “told” that wind and solar are getting cheaper every year, but without any logical fact-based demonstration of how you can supply affordable, reliable and available energy 24/7 without consuming carbon. Oh, but wait, perhaps in 2030 batteries will be cheaper??
    The world we live in right now means that every wind and solar generator must be 100% backed up by reliable coal/gas generators. So we must pay twice for the investment for generators. And because the utilisation factors must therefore be halved, electricity prices must increase. Why am I not surprised that wholesale electricity prices have doubled in just two years?

    50

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Wow…really scary….

      DO they say up front the ad is govt propaganda?

      20

    • #
      TdeF

      “why isn’t there the same passion to stop burning carbon in diesel trains and trucks, and in jet fuel powered planes, and in petrol/diesel cars, and in gas heated buildings and houses?”

      There is, or at least there was. This is the new orchestrated attack. Coal first.

      When the carbon tax first came out in 2007, it hit people in graves, cars, trucks, coal, gas, everything. The knee jerk reaction meant the schemers had to think again. So now they focus on ‘dirty’ coal. No votes lost. No one sees coal. They just pay their electricity bills. So it is also hidden a layer down where the retailer has to buy wind and solar certificates with your money, so it doesn’t even appear on your bill. The retailer (AGL) doesn’t complain as he marks it up x2 as an expense. Cash for nothing at all, which is why AGL are desperate to close Liddell.

      All we see is the tripling of electricity and the vilification of coal. Petrol will be last.

      The world’s biggest carbon tax, hidden. Job done.

      30

  • #
    Ian1946

    More pie in the sky from renew economy

    The new link would provide greater opportunity for South Australia to unlock even more of its low-cost renewable energy sources, it would reduce the reliance on expensive gas in that state, and would help fill the gap caused by the retirement of more coal generators in NSW

    https://reneweconomy.com.au/nsw-coal-replaced-south-australia-wind-solar-21224/

    SA can’t generate enough power for it’s own use most of the time but they think it can provide enough power to supply NSW.

    Pure fantasy.

    50

    • #
      wal1957

      What will end up happening is that the coal generators in NSW will not be producing when the excess wind power from SA is coming in.
      Therefore, the coal generators costs go up, and the bills in NSW go up as well. All to accommodate the SA push for ‘green’ energy. Effectively, NSW consumers end up subsidising South Aust’s obsession with wind power.

      The only winners in this are the owners of the wind farms in SA.
      The government, (we the taxpayers) build the interconnector and then the consumers in NSW pay extra as their electricity cost go up.

      This renewable energy scam is like a desperate gambler who rather than pulling out once he has lost his money, decides to go for broke and doubles down. And broke is what this country is going to be if this scenario continues.

      70

      • #
        Hanrahan

        Wal, NSW has been an importer 24/7 for months now, usually 1GW short so you are not subsidising anyone. It’s Qld taking up the slack and making $1 mill a day doing so. I’ll agree that we would all be better off had SA remained self sufficient.

        00

    • #
      yarpos

      Most of Renew is fantasy and spin. Its an alternate universe.

      60

  • #
    pattoh

    The ShardiLarts & their shills & toadies need not worry about the Coal Exports ruining their “Green Fairy Story”;

    they have their willing propagandists twisting the story, re-writing history so we don’t get the “truth”:-

    http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=5846

    It appears that the BoM is not the only institution which knows about Lies, Damn Lies & Statistics

    40

  • #
    cedarhill

    Which means Australia has 300 years to develop thorium based power plants and moving their mining industry over to thorium processing and export.

    00

  • #
    pat

    smug Guardian piece about some projections:

    2 Jul: Guardian: Matt Canavan’s optimistic coal forecast contradicts his own department
    Minister says ‘we’d be mad not to’ mine Galilee basin, despite report showing steep price drop from 2020
    by Gareth Hutchens
    A senior federal minister has claimed new coal export figures strengthen the investment case for Adani’s Carmichael coalmine and the development of Queensland’s Galilee basin, but a report from his own department appears to show the opposite.

    The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science released a report on Monday (LINK) that included projections for global commodity prices and volumes.

    A story in the Australian claiming coal was set to regain its spot “as the nation’s biggest export earner”, overtaking iron ore in 2018-19, quoted the resources minister, Matthew Canavan, as saying “the market conditions are right” for Queensland’s Galilee basin to start digging up large amounts of coal…

    The report says the combined value of metallurgical and thermal coal exports will be $60.2bn in 2017-18, behind iron ore at $61.8bn.
    It says coal exports will be slightly lower at $58.1bn in 2018-19, and that iron ore earnings will be even lower at $57.7bn, as falling iron ore prices drive export earnings lower…
    But the report says coal export earnings will soon drop below those for iron ore again, as global coal prices fall.
    In 2019-20 coal export earnings will be just $51.1bn, while iron ore earnings will be $55.4bn…ETC

    The shadow energy minister, Mark Butler, said the figures from the report were being misrepresented.
    “Minister Canavan and PM Turnbull may think it’s their job to present this as a booming market, but the Australian people, especially those living and working in thermal coal communities, deserve to be treated with respect and intelligence,” Butler said.
    “This is not a booming market, it is one in long-term structural decline as the world moves to lower-pollution forms of electricity generation to address climate change.
    “We need to manage the ongoing transition in our economy, including the long–term structural decline of thermal coal, with policies to create new jobs and industries and deliver a just transition to thermal coal communities. Anything short of that is selling workers, communities and our collective future short.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/02/matt-canavans-optimistic-coal-forecast-contradicts-his-own-department

    00

  • #
    pat

    media never fails to give them publicity:

    26 Jun: WhitsundayTimesQld: Front Line Action On Coal digs Labor on coal policy
    by Kyle Evans
    ANTI- Adani activists have sent an impassioned message to the Labor Party after defacing a billboard outside Bowen that carries the Labor Party’s logo.
    Whitsunday Regional Councillor and Labor Party member Mike Brunker labelled it an attention- seeking stunt and said he was disappointed

    The billboard which was redecorated to read “Adani Hates Workers” was placed by activists last week as part of an effort leading up to Saturday when groups across Australia are expected to hold protests to call for no new coal projects in Australia.
    One of the creators of the defaced Labor billboard, Jade Hill, said it represented what most Australians were thinking…

    She said if the Carmichael mine went ahead, it would cause climate chaos and would be thoroughly automated, providing very few jobs for local workers.
    Frontline Action on Coal spokesman Matt Franklin said more and more ordinary Australians were joining the civil resistance to end coal and secure a safe climate…

    Cr Brunker said: “I think they are doing it for media attention.
    “The more stunts they pull, the more attention they get and that’s what they want to see.”
    He said these groups were money-making ventures and were profiting from Adani.
    https://www.whitsundaytimes.com.au/news/front-line-action-on-coal-digs-labor-on-coal-polic/3453035/

    same mob, Melbourne branch, get publicity for their FIVE protesters:

    2 Jul: EchoNetDaily (Northern Rivers NSW): Melbourne men drop daks in ‘cheeky’ coal protest
    As part of a 30-hour demonstration at the Flinders Street Station intersection, members of Frontline Action on Coal Melbourne (FLAC Melbourne), showed their displeasure at the government by baring their backsides under the clocks at Flinders St Station.

    The five men took the dramatic action to call on the government to put an end to all new coal mines. A spokesperson for the group said, ‘It’s time to draw a red line on the environmental destruction, corruption and lies of the coal industry.’
    ‘We apologise to anyone offended by the image, but we are determined to do whatever it takes to end our use of fossil fuels. While some may find it offensive, we find the inaction by our government as even more offensive’.

    The Melbourne action was part of a widespread National Day of Action to finally draw a red line on all new coal projects, and comprised more than 20 simultaneous actions being staged across Australia on June 29 and 30, including banner drops, blockading of Wagners (Adani airport contractor), railway blockade (Acland), street parties, and rallies…

    ‘We have crossed a climate tipping point and it will take concerted, nonviolent, civil resistance to tip it back. At the end of this financial year, Australians are drawing a #RedLine on coal.’
    https://www.echo.net.au/2018/07/melbourne-men-drop-daks-cheeky-coal-protest/

    00

  • #
    sophocles

    Aha, somet’ing bees broke. Termorra.

    00

  • #
    sophocles

    Okay, a reply here to #38 went to #31. Somet’ing bees badly broke. :-) . It should have been #38.1 and this should be #38.2
    #36 should be #32.1 (or #31.1 if #31 is removed and #32 is renumbered correctly.)
    #37, #38 and #31 along with this one can be deleted. That’s if a mod gets this far :-)

    Never mind. It’s half-past past my bedtime so I’m off to bed. Bye all.
    (this should turn into #39.)

    00

  • #
    Robber

    We could export a lot more coal if we stopped burning it ourselves.
    Let’s use SA as the role model for Australia and make it 100% wind-powered.
    Average electricity demand in SA is about 1,500 MW, minimum overnight 1000 MW, evening peak about 2,000 MW.
    So at 30% capacity factor, SA needs 5,000 MW of wind generators. It already has 1,800 MW, so well on the way.
    But wait, sometimes the wind doesn’t blow, so we need backup to cover the evening peak of 2,000 MW.
    SA doesn’t use coal, so it needs to be gas. Allowing 20% as a contingency, we need 2,400 MW of gas generator capacity.
    Therefore, to cover SA’s demand, we need 5,000 MW of wind and 2,400 MW of gas generators to meet an average demand of 1,500 MW and a peak of 2,000 MW. That’s an average utilisation factor of just 20% overall.
    Now consider this: If we hadn’t invested $9 billion in those wind generators, we could still cover SA’s demand with only the 2,400 MW of gas generators that are just sitting there idling most of the time, fully staffed, with the only variable cost being the cost of gas. Now tell me again how wind is the lowest cost electricity, when it must be paired with a reliable power generator. Oops, another problem, we need about 30% synchronised power from a reliable source. (Overnight SA wind was providing 1,300 MW versus demand of 1,100 MW, so AEMO was forced to intervene to keep 300 MW of gas operating, with the surplus sent to Vic.)
    But wait, there’s more, what happens when the wind blows hard overnight, generating say 4,000 MW versus demand of only 1,000 MW? Why, we build a huge new interconnector to NSW and offer them the surplus, very cheap, forcing other generators in NSW to cutback and become less economic, but still required because SA wind is so unreliable.

    Perhaps to become completely self-sufficient, SA needs new industries that only operate when the wind blows strongly. Or they could have a 100% electric car and truck fleet, only to be charged when the wind is blowing strongly. Ah, Utopia is coming, but at what cost?

    00

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Are gas turbines staffed? I thought they were remote turn-key operated. I know the early open cycle power plants are.

      00

  • #
    Geoff

    Meanwhile back at coal, the subject. How is it the media do not just spell it out. Coal GOOD, National Socialism BAD.

    Without coal exports the ABC would not exist.

    Large numbers of people die each year because of uncontrolled burning of high ash and sulphur coals. Equally millions are saved by using Australian coals to fire their power stations and steel production.

    There is a very large quantity of coal in Australia. A lot more than 300 years worth. If we ceased exporting it just how many millions would die? This would be premeditated. No excuse. The “environmentalists” are quite prepared to kill people they do not know for the sake of “saving them”. The only thing most of them have in common is that they are financed by, or work for, the government.

    140

  • #

    why keep a tedious and vexatious off topic post at the top of a thread???

    30

  • #

    this comment feels lonely and off topic itself… but well done improving this blog

    30

  • #
    MudCrab

    Dave,

    you seem unaware of The Hero’s Journey and your basic Joseph Campbell theory.

    The stages of importance here are

    1 – The Call to Adventure
    and
    2 – Refusal of the Call

    There are 15 more stages. From memory one of the later ones is Destroying the Death Star but we digress.

    The important thing to understand that Refusal of the Call an the important part of being a hero, is perfectly healthy and normal and you probably are stressing for no reasons. Sit back, relax and wait for your own personal Call to Adventure!

    30

  • #
    sophocles

    Geoff alleged:

    Large numbers of people die each year because of uncontrolled burning of high ash and sulphur coals.

    Can you quote sources and give figures please?

    Since the “Acid Rain” scare of the 1960′s, coal plants have had to have electrostatic precipitators attached to their exhaust stacks across Europe, and Oceania and North America to prevent that problem. I don’t know about Asia but they would be silly to not to have followed suit. Japan has this thing about cherry blossom and sulphur oxides in the air and acids in the rain would mark that badly, so I guess they followed suit too.

    00

  • #
    sophocles

    Geoff, please see my comment at #35 … thanks.

    00

  • #
    sophocles

    Hmm, interesting. Both of the above were on the “Reply” link to Geoff’s comment at # 31 but posted as separate posts. This is to the “Reply” of #36, so let’s see where it goes …

    00