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

Turn off the tap: World Bank uses US funds to push Paris and renewables

All gravy taps flow to Paris

World Bank, Money. Trump got the US out of Paris, but US taxpayers are still funding pointless climate-control deals.

The World Bank is supposed to be sorting out poverty. Instead it’s enriching the renewables industry, and keeping the poor stuck on unreliable low grade energy.

Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accords, but the US is spending billions to implement it

Tim Pearce, Daily Caller

The World Bank is spending millions in government funding from various countries, including the U.S., to implement climate mitigation strategies in line with an international agreement to fight climate change — the Paris climate accords.

No other country could sort out the World Bank as quickly as the US:

The U.S. is the World Bank’s largest supporter and shareholder owning 17 percent of organization’s shares. The next largest owner, Japan, owns just under 8 percent. Several bills moving through Congress would grant the World Bank, along with other Multilateral Development Banks, roughly $1.8 billion.

“Climate change is a threat to the core mission of the World Bank Group,” the World Bank’s 83 page Climate Change Action Plan for 2016-2020 states.

Leapfrog the poor into Neverland:

World Bank, Africa, Map

The World Bank’s strategy, generally, is to leapfrog the fossil fuel rung of the “energy ladder” and construct grids powered by zero-emission renewable energy sources in countries with wide-spread systemic poverty. Wind and solar energy is intermittent power reliant on the weather and energy is produced at a higher cost relative to fossil fuels.

Read it all

The US could distribute that aid direct to the countries that need it. Imagine what a difference a few reliable coal plants could make in Africa. Last time TonyFromOz looked, 15 million people in Mali used the same electricity as the 40,000 pop. town of Dubbo did. See those African energy use statistics.

Save the poor, stop feeding The World Bank.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (62 votes cast)
Turn off the tap: World Bank uses US funds to push Paris and renewables, 9.8 out of 10 based on 62 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ybtfzpc5

96 comments to Turn off the tap: World Bank uses US funds to push Paris and renewables

  • #
    Robin Guenier

    There’s a simple solution: bypass the World Bank and enlist other investors. For example, here’s Akinwumi Adesina, President of the African Development Bank, thanking the Government of Japan for its support in launching the “Africa Energy Initiative”: http://tiny.cc/6gomvy. He says:

    Japan has answered our call to make it easier for African governments to adopt a balanced energy mix of all available energy sources and technologies, including the best low-emitting clean coal technologies, where they form part of a least-cost sector development plan.

    Here’s more: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/4/south-africa-takes-lead-race-clean-coal/. I liked this from Samson Bada from Nigeria:

    I am tired of being lectured by people in rich countries who have never lived a day without electricity. Maybe they should just go home and turn off their fridge, hot water, their laptops and lights. Then live like that for a month and tell us, who have suffered for years, not to burn coal.

    And Jacob Masiala from Congo:

    Aid groups come to Africa and give out solar lamps the size of a pumpkin. But no one in London or Los Angeles would be willing to make do with that. We need power for cities, factories, mines and to run schools and hospitals. Tanzania, for example, has around 70 percent of its people still short of electricity while it sits on 4 billion tons of coal. And we have activists from wealthy countries who chant, ‘Leave it in the ground.’

    340

    • #
      Geoff

      Then there are all the volatiles (n-anes, n-enes, phenols) in the coal pores. This may be as much as 55% of its dry ash free weight. Their current value is US$67+/barrel.

      Imagine what could happen to the world’s GDP if those hydrocarbons and ash could be separated from the carbon at a low cost.

      Now consider the CO2 issue.

      It is now possible to electrolyse water at a low cost, (current required less than 10% Faraday).

      Removing the hydrocarbons from the coal allows the carbon to be burnt in oxygen in a power station to give separated CO2. This CO2 can be added to hydrogen to make methane for local use. The CO2 can be separated from the oxidized methane.

      The ash can be mixed with lime to make geopolymer cement.

      Simply by embracing new coal technologies solves the non-problem of CO2 in the electrical energy stream by closing out the carbon cycle at a profit.

      No government money required.

      121

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        No doubt that cutting edge, green research institution, the CSIRO, that’s so well funded by the Australian taxpayer, is just days away from patenting new IP that’ll lock-in the technology for the benefit of its investors?

        No? What do you mean, no?

        You mean it’s not even on its “To do” list? Well, who would have guessed.

        I’ll get Malcolm onto it right away.

        30

        • #
          Geoff

          Fortunately, there are many sources of relevant IP. While the CSIRO and universities are constrained by politics, oil companies and miners are not. However, individuals in such companies who control budgets are constrained by the perception of risk. They can often keep their jobs by doing nothing more than what they currently do or shifting any blame for what does not happen elsewhere.

          Many people have tried to separate oil from its binding material. The only economic successes have used hydrocarbon based solvents (hydrocarbons are miscible) or steam. In the case of steam, its expensive. At a crude price of US$70 per barrel it is profitable. Hydrocarbon solvents are targeted at specific molecular chain lengths. What is required are solvents that target C28. Great for tar sands. As most tar sands are buried it will mean in-situ mining. Tar sand oil extraction rates in-situ using steam is about 10% of possible, using the solvent it is 99.9%. The hydrocarbon solvent is not benign. Heat it up and it boils off. For in-situ work this is a big problem. Insitu hydrocarbon solvent loss may be an environmental and/or economic catastrophe. This is not to say that bitumen is benign. However, if aromatics are released to a water supply……..benzene and benezene sulfonamides may make you famous. For deep bitumens in oil reserves this is not a problem.

          The politics and policies of government are not helpful. Huge political swings trying to sate green voters is very bad for financial spreadsheets. Most green voters cannot relate their behaviour to market forces. They are happy to talk to other green voters from their motor vehicle about bad oil companies on the way to work at a government department.

          Most grant funding goes to propping up the system, not making prototypes and pilot plants.

          The best way to change this is to change the tax system.

          What is the reward? In Victoria there is enough oil trapped in coal to more than double the world’s 1P oil reserves. This does not count Queensland, make that quadruple the oil reserves. No exploration required.

          50

    • #
      Robin Guenier

      This article summarises what’s happening in Africa: Chinese-backed coal plant jeopardises Kenya climate target. An extract:

      With the support of its state-owned banks, China is investing heavily across Africa. And despite showing off the climate champion badge for its US$3.1bn contribution to international climate finance, much of that investment is going into coal development.

      After decades of struggles with the red tape of the aid industry, African governments are embracing Beijing’s no-strings-attached attitude.

      40

      • #
        Ceetee

        Ok heres my 2 cents worth. Africa is blessed with coal as it is with a variety of mineral assets. As I have previously stated here the Chinese are no mugs. They operate like Trump with the luxury of not being vilified from within a democratic society which means they can play both sides with impunity. Our shit for brains hopelessly captured media won’t actually pin down what is actually happening for fear of compromising their carefully scripted prejudicial certainty.
        Just as an aside it occurs to me that coal is the ultimate organic product. Think about it, no man made factory produced it, it contains masses of life giving energy and even if used in the most basic way provides food for plants. It fuelled the miracle of the industrial revolution and created wealth. No wonder left wing twits hate it, it deprived them of the misery they need to be relevant.

        40

  • #
    John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia

    Meanwhile, China has found a way of colonization and influence through coal.

    200

    • #
      Robin Guenier

      Thanks – an astonishing list.

      70

      • #
        Geoffrey Williams

        I agree Robin-an astonishing list indeed. And well done to John of Cloverdale.
        The list is most informative and surely begs the lie that we keep hearing from the left/green climate alarmists that ‘renewables are the way of the future’!
        When will these people face up to reality?
        GeoffW

        40

      • #
        Leonard Lane

        Robin, it is astonishing and scheming cruelty to treat people in Africa that way (renewables).

        50

      • #
        Robin Guenier

        Here’s some background to that list: LINK, LINK and LINK.

        So, yes, it may be true that China is becoming the global climate leader – but it’s leadership in precisely the opposite direction from that which many Western commentators consider essential.

        20

    • #
      PeterS

      I see US is on the list. So I wonder when will Australia be on it.

      50

      • #
        Dennis

        I remember the very upset Minister for Foreign Affairs & Trade, Julie Bishop, when Prime Minister Abbott and Treasurer Hockey refused her extra funding to pledge to the UN in 2014, and she gave the UN $50 million and year over 4 years from the foreign aid budget.

        However, this link explains our involvement in the World Bank:

        http://dfat.gov.au/international-relations/international-organisations/multilateral-development-banks/Pages/world-bank.aspx

        50

        • #
          PeterS

          In other words she like Turnbull is a globalist who are interested more about influencing the policies and agendas of other nations than being concerned about Australia’s national interests. They are either doing it without realising it and so are innocently stupid and ignorant, or they do know what they are doing and hence are disloyal and deceitful. Either way they are a serious danger to Australia’s interests. Of course we already knew that given their past performance.

          110

        • #
          Sceptical Sam

          Thanks Dennis.

          From your link:

          The Australian Government supports economic development in the Indo-Pacific region through contributions to the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA). The IDA fund is the largest pool of concessional finance in the world, providing grants and highly concessional loans to 74 low-income countries.
          and
          Negotiations for the 18th replenishment of IDA (2017-18 to 2019-20) concluded in December 2016. USD75 billion will be available to client countries, through highly concessional loans and grants, to advance sustainable economic development and reduce poverty. and

          Australia will contribute AUD774.45 million to the IDA18 replenishment, which will be drawn from Australia’s aid program over a nine-year period.

          At least it comes off Australia’s foreign aid budget. But then, that’s just putting it in the hands of the green-left.

          How much does the People’s Republic of China contribute? (Given the comment and link provided by John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia at No 2 above).

          I’ll get Malcolm onto it. That’ll fix it.

          30

  • #
    Tom Anderson

    The unstoppable flow of money and power through global bureaucracy is just what meteorology Professor Tim Ball of Canada has written about for years. Ball’s account of the UN climate campaign has been meticulously researched and confirmed elsewhere in a book by Canadian journalist Elaine Dewar. Ball summarized its activities and undiminished progress in a recent post:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=Whatever+Happened+to+Agenda+21+and+Climate+Change+Policy%3F

    20

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Regardless what’s said about Trump his directness of calling out a bad deal has been very effective in exposing the crony capitalists, this a personal irritation for me after watching years of misdirection of taxpayer money and national resources that could’ve made discoveries and differences to peoples lives in so many positive ways.

    Instead we allowed the wealth to be used against us giving power to shallow greedy people with ugly views of life and souls to match, calling out tyranny is long overdue but like Trump we must keep our wits while doing so as the opposition usually don’t and this is our advantage.

    240

    • #

      This is pretty much the core reason for Trump hate, he exposes the lies, hypocrisy and corruption that’s rampant in the world.

      200

      • #
        PeterS

        Correct. Trump is a successful business man who went through hard times and so has found out how to conduct business opportunities for maximum success, unlike most previous Presidents who are simply clueless career politicians. Trump has hit a raw nerve with the crooked and anti-truth left and the left are having tantrum fits as a result as witnessed over and over with the latest being at the recent visit to the UK. There will be more to come, which only proves the left have lost it and have only one goal – the destruction of the West as we know it and replacing it with some kind of Marxist-like dictatorship similar to what Soviet Russia used to be. So now the left are criticising Trump siding with Russia and betraying the US, which is false on two accounts. One, he is not siding with Russia. Clearly it’s fake news by the leftists MSM. Two, Russia today is actually anti-Marxist and has reverted back to being a strong Christian nation. So perhaps the real reason the left hate Trump allegedly siding with Russia is that Russia is a Christian nation and the extreme left hate Christians. Russia and Putin are certainly not perfect but neither is any other country, including the US. So the left are not only barking up the wrong tree they are barking mad and inexorably insane.

        170

        • #

          The irony, for the Left, is that the more they carry on with fake news about Trump, the more people begin to turn to him, not against him.

          The Democrats, the MSM and the clueless Left in general are the Republican’s greatest assets in the coming elections. Who would have thought that there’d be a #WalkAway movement last year?

          90

          • #
            PeterS

            I hope you are right but don’t forget the public by and large are gullible. The left realise this and so they will keep repeating their fake news and tantrum fits in the hope the public will eventually start doubting about Trump’s intentions and question them. Time will tell weather they succeed or not. The other fear is the pendulum could swing to far the other way and we end up with a ruthless extreme right-wing ruler in the US or Europe. Perhaps history will repeat once again. I hope not but one thing is for sure. The left is playing with fire and they are destabilising society in so many ways even most of them don’t see it. I don’t see any non-violent way to stop it before it risks going too far. We can only hope that the public in general keep their senses and ignore the left, which is getting harder and harder. Here in Australia though it appears we’ve lost that war already but I sincerely hope to be proven wrong at the next election.

            50

          • #
            Latus Dextro

            # Walk Away

            00

  • #

    Areva in its brief and horrible history as globe-striding energy company managed some wreckage in Australia with its solar boondoggle at Kogan Creek. (The actual losses it incurred under media and government darling Anne Lauvergeon, mainly as a nuclear giant, may go as high as 15 billion euros. Nobody is asking too hard and Supergirl Anne is still giving that famous atomic grin.) Kogan Creek solar was an obvious disaster before it even got underway.

    The projects of Oceanlinx in Australia were obvious disasters before they even got underway.

    Timmy’s Geothermia was an obvious disaster before it even got underway.

    I could go on. The point is that we will not be able to go forward till we nab the people behind Big Green’s greatest bungles here in Australia. Where a measure of good faith and competence can be shown we should go easy. Where, however, a project had no hope as anything but an expensive farce we need to track down each and every one of the responsible actors and grill them under Australian law.

    The World Bank is another case of government by technocrats for the benefit of lobbyists (who too often get their start on the other side of the table). But before investigating incompetence and dodginess elsewhere, we first need to show Africa that this great white b’wana is on the up-and-up where he lives.

    150

    • #
      Sceptical Sam

      I could go on.

      We need to keep a tab of green energy disasters so that they are readily available for all to reference.

      We must never let them slide under the carpet.

      So, if I may be so bold, please do go on. And on.

      It would make a very nice addition to Jo’s Index.

      40

      • #

        What about Tassie? Okay, nothing wrong with hydro or undersea cables. But if drought is a sure eventuality and undersea cables often break, surely Tassie’s exposure was obvious.

        It cost $44 million to set up the diesel gen and up to $22 million a month to run. To that we can add the huge losses to eg Bell Bay Aluminium, Temco’s magnesium alloy factory and the Norske Skog paper mill.

        Of course the real danger, as one can’t repeat enough, is exposure to the world oil price and even loss of supply. It is just crazy to use diesel for mainstream power and the practice should be banned or strictly limited by Federal legislation on strategic and national security grounds.

        It should have been obvious to a green aphid let alone a green politician.

        90

    • #
      Peter C

      Timmy’s geothermal was an obvious disaster before it even got underway

      That caught my interest. I thought that geothermal energy might be a useful technology and followed the project quite closely for a number of years. I went to take another look

      I found that the company has been rebirthed on the ASX and all of the old references to the company have been removed from the ASX website. Also some one at Wikipaedia has carefully removed all the links from their website. It certainly looks like a deliberate act. Green activists rewriting history.

      The company went under having used up a lot of money from Goverment grants and private investors.

      80

      • #

        Above I mention “Atomic” Anne Lauvergeon, responsible for numerous and mounting catastrophes (starting out with her attempt to wipe out the Paris catacombs, instead merely damaging them). If you look at her Wiki page you’d think she was a stylish advertisement for girl power and affirmative action.

        Kind of like having a wiki page on il Duce starting with his school-teaching days and ending with Benito making the trains run on time.

        40

  • #
    PeterS

    Actually Trump hasn’t yet got the US out of the Paris Agreement. He has simply announced his intentions that he wants to do so. In accordance with Article 28 of the Paris Agreement, the earliest possible effective withdrawal date by the US cannot be before November 4, 2020, four years after the Agreement came into effect in the US and one day after the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The White House later clarified that the U.S. will abide by the four-year exit process. Until the withdrawal takes effect, the US may be obligated to maintain its commitments under the Agreement, such as the requirement to continue reporting its emissions to the UN. In reality of course while Trump remains President of the US it is unlikely he will bother to comply with the reporting and certainly will not abide by the agreement to reduce their emissions. We should do the same given the other large emitters (China, India, etc.) have no intention to reduce their emissions for some fake science about the CAGW scam.

    70

  • #
    David Maddison

    I hope Mr Trump knows about this and he won’t be pleased.

    61

  • #
    Graham Richards

    If our banks are rotten from the top down can you imagine how septic the World Bank is? They too are an instrument of the left & the NWO.
    Then there’s the IMF. The head honch Ms La Garde is even suspected of fraud/taking commissions. Wherever the left dwell is a septic swamp!

    20

  • #
    Latus Dextro

    Australians do seem to have their fingers in many pies and just seem to love making donations, from feeding the Clinton beast to running the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
    The good news? The UN’s Green Climate Fund is described to be at a ‘Low Point’ after Director Howard Bamsey, an Australian diplomat who served as the executive director since January 2017 resigned.

    The UNFCCC (coincidentally the same ideological folk that defined UN “climate change”) formally invited the World Bank to act as the key trustee of the UN Green Climate Fund agreeing to provide interim trustee services to the GCF (receive financial contributions, hold and invest them, and transfer them upon the instructions of the GCF).
    And why not? Keep it in the ‘family’.

    Currently, the World Bank advises that the GCF balance is US$3,743.88 million with total contributions of US$7,013.47

    Australia donated US$152.52 million and NZ US$2.2 million.
    The Japanese are the largest donor at US$1,358.13 million followed by the US at US$1000 million.

    Total cash transfers amount to US$464.25 million. US$273.84 million (59%) has been disbursed to projects and THE REMAINING BALANCES of US$177.44 million is sucked up in “administrative budget” and “project supervision fees” of US$12.97 million.

    Someone, no, several people are making a very, very large amount of money on the side.

    40

    • #
      Latus Dextro

      Peak SJW signalling
      One must add, just in case it escaped notice, that Australian politicians should slap themselves heartily on the back. Their entire donation to the UN GCF is absorbed by World Bank administrative costs and supervision fees.

      130

      • #
        Dennis

        It’s not their money so why would they be concerned?

        It’s much more important to have seats at the table and contacts for future career prospects.

        80

      • #
        Kinky Keith

        Just converting the Australian donation to the U.N. and World bank from AUD to USD gets the banks about 4% on the currency skim. Then add the transfer fee.

        Outgoing to contractors and local warlords is the same.

        A totally Compassionate business.

        KK

        80

    • #
      Latus Dextro

      #7 Latus Dextro
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.
      July 17, 2018 at 8:11 am

      00

  • #
    manalive

    The World Bank’s strategy, generally, is to leapfrog the fossil fuel rung of the “energy ladder” and construct grids powered by zero-emission renewable energy sources …

    Instead of leapfrogging the fossil fuel rung up the ‘energy ladder’ the World Bank strategy will send the poor and developing nations off the net energy cliff (there are doubts about the number shown for nuclear).

    40

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    A very timely topic, looking at the ways that the “elites” skim our labour and energy to make a better world for Themselves.

    Robin highlights the reality of the World Bank’s involvement in reducing world poverty by quoting some African leaders who presumably aren’t “on the take”.

    They see the activity of Renewables obsessed support as patronising tokenism.

    In recent years the money sent to the U.N.from Australia has been high. In some cases it has gone towards the U.N. but hasn’t quite reached it.

    Maybe Bill or Hillary may have seen it?

    The point is we need a fresh start. Disengage from the U.N.and World bank and check first to make sure that all past contributions are accounted for.

    We just return government to those who vote here. No external, unaccountable organisation should receive Australian taxpayers money.

    KK

    90

    • #
      PeterS

      Easier said than done. First we need to stop voting 1 for either of the two major parties. I can’t see many Australians interested in changing their habitual voting patterns.

      40

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        If you look at many of the new Bilsl that go to Parliament, you will often find many of them use the parasitic UN treaties we are signe dup to as a framework.

        In effect, this makes the International Court in The Hague as our highest court and former of a sleight-of-hand by-passing of the Constitution….

        50

  • #
    pat

    while I continue to search – BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO BE FOUND ONLINE SO FAR??? … not even showing as behind paywall – could someone try to locate the following?

    I heard on 2GB last nite (Michael Pachi standing in for Michael McLaren) that the front page of The Australian has story on a couple of questions asked in the latest Newspoll.

    one question to the effect: do you think Australia should exit the Paris climate agreement?

    48 PERCENT OF AUSTRALIANS SAID YES.

    the percentage that said “no” wasn’t mentioned, so can’t talk to that as yet, but presumably some may have said “don’t no”, so the 48% was likely a majority.

    yikes.

    50

    • #
      pat

      by dropping the word “newspoll” I just got this:

      Coalition’s power pricing policies finally gaining … – The Australian
      https://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/climate/…/99463da8f4de2e1cd347764eae665aa2
      8 hours ago – However, support for Australia to pull out of the Paris climate change agreement is also hardening as the electorate becomes increasingly concerned about …

      50

      • #
        pat

        a variation found by some tweaking…

        Coalition’s power pricing policies finally gaining traction with voters
        https://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/coalitions-power-pricing-policies-finally-gaining-tra…
        8 hours ago – Coalition’s power pricing policies finally gaining traction with voters … ***rise to 48 per cent of voters claiming to be in favour of withdrawal if it led …

        WHY WASN’T THIS IN THE NEWS BULLETINS THIS MORNING???? INSTEAD OF AEMO FUBBISH ABOUT BUILDING NEW COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS NOT BEING VIABLE, AND FRYDENBERG TALKING OUT OF TWO SIDES OF HIS MOUTH AS USUAL?

        100

        • #
          Robber

          “Donald Trump announced that the US is pulling out of the Paris agreement as costs outweighed the likely benefit. If pulling out could result in lower electricity prices would be be in favour or opposed to Australia pulling out?”
          In favour 48%; Opposed 38%; Uncommitted 14%.
          Coalition 59/29/13
          Labor 37/52/11
          Greens 26/63/11
          One Nation 75/16/9
          Are you listening pollies? Meanwhile we get the AEMO report on the increasing costs of the transition to unreliable wind/solar, all because of Paris. Remove all subsidies, and let the market decide how to deliver affordable electricity.

          120

          • #
            pat

            Robber -

            many thanks.

            here’s another, but note it doesn’t mention the actual Paris question details:

            17 Jul: 9News: Coalition ‘more trusted’ than Labor to deliver on power price promise: Newspoll
            Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s promise to bring down power prices appears to have struck a chord with voters, with the Coalition now considered the most trusted party to deal with Australia’s energy crisis.
            Labor is now trailing behind the Coalition in terms of “trustworthiness” where it comes to delivering pledged cost cuts and more reliable energy, according to the latest Newspoll, The Australian reports.

            The poll shows Coalition has a 40 to 34 percent lead, up by six points since a poll back in May that placed Labor at the fore.
            It also reveals almost two-thirds of participants prioritise cost reduction above emissions reduction, ***suggesting a growing push for Australia to abandon the Paris climate change agreement…

            The Newspoll, conducted between July 12 and 15, shows Labor, Greens and One Nation voters see bringing pricing down as a top federal government priority…
            Greens voter support for Mr Turnbull’s cost-cutting goals has also increased from 15 to 20 percent.
            https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/07/17/06/03/newspoll-coalition-labor-malcolm-turnbull-power-energy-price-crisis-josh-frydenburg

            20

    • #
      John F. Hultquist

      “don’t no”

      My mother would say: “Don’t no, me” — and that was time to back away.

      20

  • #
    PeterS

    Here’s another World Bank contradiction.

    World Bank Developing an Inclusive South Africa
    versus
    Horror In South Africa

    It appears the World Bank’s idea of property rights for South Africans translates to an Idi Amin style regime change.

    Also the World Bank admits:
    Disruptions to the economy and jobs as South Africa transitions to a low-carbon economy will need to be mitigated carefully, the diagnostic suggests. Climate change also puts further pressure on the country’s scarce water resources which require long-term planning and strategic adaptation. (http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/southafrica/publication/developing-an-inclusive-equal-south-africa)

    So South Africa has to sacrifice itself in more ways than one, with the approval of the World Bank.

    40

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Anything linked to the UN, IMHO, is sus….World Bank etc

      If you look at the world bank as an enabler for global financial slavery, the UN as legislative global slavery and the NGOs full of well meaning but clueless helpers, you have to be impressed at how well organized it is in its attempt to implement global socialism….

      30

    • #
      sophocles

      Namibia sent the World Bank packing some decades ago and has basically “gone it alone” ever since. The commenter whom I read at the time said they were doing very well. (I think it might have been Professor Mason Gaffney (Department of Economics, University of California, Riverside, but I’m not sure.)

      His contribution to the book The Corruption of Economics [pp 29-164] co-authored with Fred Harrison (Shepheard-Walwyn Publishers) is a freely downloadable pdf and makes both fascinating and scary reading. It’s an eye-opener to why modern economists can’t make predictions which work.

      Yes, economics is as bent as Climate Change theory. Put the two together, and you have the World Bank.
      I read some decades ago, that the World Bank is 51% owned by the American Treasury. Other “member nations” own much smaller amounts.

      I see it’s web site (see Jo’s link at top) says:

      The largest shareholders include the United States (17.07% of total subscribed capital),
      Japan (7.89%), China … &c

      . “Shareholders” and “subscribed capital” … sounds like it’s usual snake oil: yes, the US is the largest shareholder with the US Treasury owning 51% of the Bank’s shares and it’s “subscribed capital” of 17.07% looks like funds the US has deposited in its “account” for the bank to lend.

      50

  • #
    RickWill

    I once did an engineering inspection of a power generation barge in Bangladesh. I was accompanied by the company MD, Chief Engineer and 3 representatives of the World Bank. We travelled by road from the airport but there were riots in one of the villages where the local political representative had been assassinated. The minibus driver suggested that it would be dangerous for us to travel through the riots so the Chief Engineer arranged for a river boat to pick us up and we could travel by boat to the power station.

    The river boat that was organised did not impress the bank representatives, dressed in dapper suits, so they refused to go. I ended up accompanying the Chief Engineer to the Station while the MD escorted the bank representatives back to the airport.

    The river boat was built from timber, about 10m long and 2m beam. It was powered by a small diesel that pushed it along around 8 knots. The pilot’s 5 year old son kept bailing on both legs going down river and back up after the inspection.

    It was the beginning of digit cameras and a lasting memory of the trip is the interest that the 5yo displayed when I took his photo and showed him the screen image.

    The visit was a big deal for this small company and about 20 of the company officials at the barge site (all with some English speaking ability) were previously arranged to attend a 6 course lunch that was hosted by the site GM. The Chief Engineer and I were the only visitors so I was somewhat embarrassed by the attention and the lavish meal.

    I expect the World Bank has impressive administration costs and its employees are far removed from the people who should be benefitting from the funds.

    210

  • #
    pat

    follow-up from comment #9:

    1hr27mins to 1hr42mins36secs:
    PACHI: front pages of newspapers coming in. interesting on front page of The Australian. Newspoll about electricity etc.
    Pachi does mention 38% opposed.

    17 Jul: 2GB: Overnights with Michael Pachi (standing in for Mike McLaren)
    https://www.2gb.com/podcast/overnights-with-michael-pachi-july-16/

    I only heard the brief mention of the Newspoll last nite, then switched off. however, Pachi goes straight to a regular 2GB caller for the rest of time I noted, who is apparently some kind of scientist, and it is worth listening to, if only to see how indoctrinated even educated Australians can be when it comes to CAGW.

    Greenland/icebergs/tsunami, parrot fish in Tasmania; cyclones coming to Sydney; Aussie will have to move to Tasmania to get away from the heat, etc.
    to be fair, the caller is in favour of building HELE coal plants, nuclear reactor in the Nullabor, etc.

    10

  • #
    pat

    reminder. today’s poll has pro-exit up 3%, opposed down 2%, uncommitted up 1% etc:

    31 Oct 2017: JoNova: 60% of Australians are OK with dumping Paris if they can cut their Electricity Bill
    Voters prefer cut in power prices to Paris climate accord
    Simon BEnson, Michael McKenna
    A Newspoll ­survey, conducted exclusively for The Australian, has revealed that 45 per cent of Australians would now ­support abandoning the non-binding target, which requires Australia to reduce emissions to 26-28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030, if it meant lower household electricity prices.

    This compares to 40 per cent who would oppose opting out of the agreement, with 15 per cent of people uncommitted. Significantly, more than a third of Labor voters backed ditching the Paris target when asked to consider whether the economic cost outweighed the likely benefit, while 54 per cent of Coalition voters backed withdrawing from the agreement if it did…
    http://joannenova.com.au/2017/10/60-of-australians-are-ok-with-dumping-paris-if-they-can-cut-their-electricity-bill/

    40

    • #
      PeterS

      We should just do what Trump has already done and just announce our intentions to exit when it’s permitted under the rules whenever that is (late 2020 if it’s the same as the US) and just ignore the nonsense right now. We can then get on with the business of rebuilding Australia just as Trump is doing instead of continuing down the path of destroying it. Can it be any clearer? Or are we destined to follow the renewables scam over the cliff under Turnbull or Shorten?

      70

  • #
    Greg in NZ

    NZ has its own UN/World Bank ‘Trojan horse’ lackey in the guise of Munster of Climate Crockology, Jim-jam Greenshaw: “If New Zealand is to meet its zero carbon pledge, nearly all the country’s cars will have to be zero-emission by 2050, Climate Change Minister James Shaw says.”

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/361709/carbon-neutral-goal-reliant-on-electric-cars-govt

    Before becoming leader of the NZ Greenhorns Party, Jim-jam not only worked for HSBC – a bank with more than a dubious history of shady international deals over the centuries – he also worked in London for PwC (accountants), another worldwide business not immune from allegations of fraud and other dodgy goings-on (too many to list here yet easy enough to find).

    Just another snake in a suit.

    40

    • #
      sophocles

      to Greg-in-NZ @ #17:

      Greg: you’ve forgotten the “visiting `Professors’ ” seconded to our Reserve Bank from various Economics Schools in America through the World Bank, to experiment with our economy. They are always there … partly to ensure we `toe the line’ and don’t try to reintroduce something which actually works. They have to keep everything which could even remotely be called `socialist’ out … like actually doing something which might help rather than pluck the `people.’ These are the true trojan horses.

      However, I can’t argue against Jim-Cat-6-Shaw. He has a Masters Degree in “Sustainable Business Management” which is open to many interpretations.

      Given the way top management of modern companies set out to enrich themselves at the expense of shareholders so their incomes are “in line” with those of the overseas “manglement” then it would seem that there is indeed a fine art to plucking a company without it failing … ie: sustainable,

      10

  • #
    pat

    UNFCCC: UN Climate Press Release / 13 Jul, 2018
    Asia Pacific Climate Week Galvanizes Regional Climate Action
    Singapore, 14 July 2018
    Actors seized on the opportunity of the Climate Week to make a number of bold new announcements…
    For example…
    •On carbon markets, the ***World Bank reaffirmed that, to date, 51 carbon pricing initiatives have been implemented or are scheduled for implementation, representing a fivefold increase in the past 10 years…

    Throughout the course of the week, carbon markets formed a major part of discussions and delegates openly called for strong leadership on the issue…
    Asia Pacific Climate Week will be followed by the Latin America and Caribbean Climate Week 2018, which is being convened from 20–23 August in Montevideo, Uruguay.
    https://unfccc.int/news/asia-pacific-climate-week-galvanizes-regional-climate-action

    LatinAmericanCarbonForum: August 21-23, 2018 – Montevideo, Uruguay
    Climate Action for Sustainable Development: Driving change in Latin America and Caribbean
    Organised by: UN this that and the other; PLUS ***WORLD BANK GROUP, IETA (International Emissions Trading Association); Development Bank of Latin America; IDB (Inter-American Development Bank) etc…

    The Latin American and Caribbean Carbon Forum (LACCF) is bringing together for the tenth consecutive year key players from the private and public sectors to share the state of the art around climate change migration, and reach out to cooperation agencies, potential investors and service providers. It is a space where climate aspirations turn into climate action…

    The event will showcase opportunities in line with the Paris Agreement such as:
    • Implementing Nationally Determined Contributions
    • Leveraging public and private finance for climate action
    • Carbon pricing mechanisms and carbon markets
    • Sustainable development and transformational change
    • Public‐private partnerships
    • Innovative business models to fight climate change
    http://www.latincarbon.com/

    00

  • #
    pat

    US might contribute 17%; China 5.09%, BUT…

    16 Jul: Xinhua: Chinese president meets World Bank president in Beijing
    BEIJING — President Xi Jinping on Monday met with World Bank President Jim Yong Kim in Beijing…
    Hailing the sound long-term cooperation between China and the World Bank, Xi said China appreciated the World Bank for supporting the Belt and Road Initiative, promoting capital increase and shareholding reforms in recent years, and improving the representation and voting power of emerging markets and developing countries, including China.

    “The World Bank is an important force in safeguarding multilateralism and economic globalization,” Xi said. “China is willing to deepen global development partnership with the World Bank, strengthen trade liberalization and facilitation, jointly promote global poverty alleviation and sustainable development, safeguard an open world economy and build a community of a shared future for humanity.”…

    The world today is a global village. Despite the constant appearance of unilateralism and protectionism, the blended interests and shared destiny of different countries and economic globalization are irresistable, and win-win cooperation represents the general trend, Xi stressed.
    “China’s development has benefited from economic globalization and trade liberalization, and contributed greatly to global economic growth as well, ” said Xi. “We oppose the false accusations against China and will firmly safeguard its legitimate interests.”…

    Kim expressed gratitude to China for its long-term great support to the World Bank. Noting that all countries should avoid shutting themselves in, and abide by the rules in the era of globalization, Kim said the World Bank appreciated China’s support for multilateralism and economic globalization, as well as for capital increase and shareholding reforms at World Bank…
    “The Belt and Road Initiative proposed by President Xi reflects farsightedness and greatly contributes to international development and cooperation and cause of poverty reduction,” Kim said. “The World Bank is willing to deepen cooperation under the initiative.”
    http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/17/c_137329204.htm

    10

    • #
      pat

      reminder – Jim Yong Kim was not due to be re-elected (or not) for second five-year term as World Bank President until after the 2016 election:

      Wikipedia: Jim Yong Kim
      On March 23, 2012, U.S. President Barack Obama announced his nomination of Jim Yong Kim to become the next president of the World Bank…
      ***On September 27, 2016, Kim was re-elected as the World Bank president, for a five-year term beginning July 1, 2017…
      On April 16, 2012, the World Bank officially elected Kim as its next president…

      however, more proof Obama/Dems knew Trump was going to win before November:

      15 Sept 2016: Financial Times: Jim Yong Kim heads for second term as World Bank President
      by Shawn Donnan in Washington
      Jim Yong Kim is heading for another five-year term as president of the World Bank after no other candidates emerged during a ***hurried nomination process.

      But critics warn that both Mr. Kim and the World Bank’s legitimacy risk being further damaged by the US’s decision to ***speed through the Korean-born American’s reappointment before President Barack Obama leaves office early next year. They also argue that the lack of other candidates is a symoptom of how many big emerging economies such as China are turning away from the Washington-based lender to focus on their own new institutions…

      In a letter last month the World Bank’s influential staff association complained of “a crisis of leadership” and asked the bank’s board to conduct a global search for a replacement for Mr. Kim, a call joined by a group of former bank officials who have been lobbying for shareholders to find a replacement.
      “He has completely failed in the past four years to establish any legitimacy as the leader of the World Bank,” said Lant Pritchett, a Harvard professor and former senior bank official who was part of a group that this week demanded the bank’s board extend the reappointment process in response to criticism of Mr. Kim.

      ***The US and other major shareholders have ignored such calls, arguing for urgency and for a move before November’s US presidential election and a possible victory by Donald Trump, the Republican candidate running on a largely isolationist platform.

      Mr. Kim was the only nomineee put forward for the World Bank’s presidency by the end of a three-week nomination period that closed on Wednesday. His rapid reappointment, which is expected to be confirmed formally by the board before next month’s annual meetings of the bank and the International Monetary Fund, contrasts with the competition that preceded his orginal appointment in 2012, when Mr. Kim faced off against former Nigerian finance minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

      Critics say it also marks a step away from the US’s promise, made at the time of Mr. Kim’s original appointment, to shift to a more open process…
      Partly in frustration at the slow progress of such reforms, China has pushed for the creation of new rival institutions such as the New Development Bank, or Brics bank, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which earlier this year announced its first projects…

      **Mr. Kim has responded by studiously courting the leadership in Beijing and other emerging capitals and vowing to work with those new institutions. That has helped him win the backing of big developing economies including China, India and Brazil for a second term.
      https://www.ft.com/content/a67937a6-7af9-11e6-ae24-f193b105145e

      hopefully, the above will provide further context to the Xinhua “Chinese president meets World Bank president in Beijing” article, especially given the timing coinciding with the Trump/Putin meeting.

      10

  • #
    RickWill

    Off topic but important report covering AEMOs Integrated System Plan:
    https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/Files/Electricity/NEM/Planning_and_Forecasting/ISP/2018/Integrated-System-Plan-2018_final.pdf

    My initial assessment is that it has not incorporated anything from the recent ACCC report or any consideration of the NEG.

    The recommendation of a 750MW link between SA and NSW will guarantee higher costs in NSW and the demise of Liddell if implemented.

    30

    • #
      RickWill

      The AEMO report is almost at odds with ACCC report. It rightly identifies that distributed ambient generation is more cost effective than grid scale ambients:

      The High DER scenario shows the potential for even greater use of DER to lower the total costs to supply, with the NPV of wholesale resource costs reduced by nearly $4 billion, compared to the Neutral case. In this scenario, the projected need for utility-scale investment and intra-regional transmission development to provide access to the incremental REZs is reduced, however it still illustrates the need for greater increased national transmission capacity to take advantage of diversity and better utilise dispatchable resources.

      The analysis in the ISP only addresses wholesale level costs, and further work is required to quantify the overall value of DER to consumers.

      Evaluation at consumer level would improve the benefits for rooftop over grid scale ambients.

      So, while ACCC are recommending that the government stop promoting rooftop solar while continue to promote grid scale, AEMO are stating that grid scale is more expensive.

      The AEMO report suggests 28GW of additional solar, 10.5GW of additional wind, 17GW/90GWh additional storage and 500MW of gas generation will replace all the coal that will retire in the next 20 years. It appears their modelling is solely based on capacity factors without accounting for timing of ambient generation.

      The AEMO report essentially doubles down on intermittents with simplistic modelling making it look feasible. Diversity pixie dust aplenty!

      It does concede that the existing coal generators need to be kept running for as long as possible but does not make any allowance for new coal.

      60

      • #

        How good is this?

        The AEMO report suggests 28GW of additional solar, 10.5GW of additional wind, 17GW/90GWh additional storage…..

        So, let me see now.

        That’s all the current solar plant installations in Australia multiplied by 30. (and in those same 20 years, they’ll need to replace every one of those existing solar plants)

        That’s all the current wind plant installations in Australia multiplied by two. (and in those same 20 years, they’ll need to replace every one of those existing wind plants)

        That’s the Hornsdale battery plant multiplied by, umm, 1300.

        I couldn’t even guess at the cost, but it will have ELEVEN zeros after the first number.

        And THIS will bring power costs ….. down?????

        Tony.

        170

        • #
          PeterS

          Tony if you listen carefully to what everyone in the government is saying in response to both the ACCC report and the AEMO report it’s clear they are still committed to reducing our emissions as the number one priority. That includes the likes of Abbott. Power prices is really not their priority because it were we would be hearing from them strong support for the building of new coal fired power stations to add more electricity to the grid and bring down prices as a result of competition once they are on-line. That’s exactly what Ian Macfarlane, Chief Executive of the Qld Resources Council, has recently stated. Competition is good an we need it now. He is hopeful that the NEG will deliver such an environment. Let’s wait and see.

          40

        • #
          RickWill

          PeterS
          Malcolm Turnbull is on record as stating that the only thing that matters is price. He stated that after release of the ACCC report.

          It appears to me that the NEG will reduce the price setting function of AEMO. That would reduce their position in the NEM so is likely something they want to avoid.

          20

          • #
            PeterS

            I like to know how they can keep reducing emissions and at the same time reduce prices. I don’t believe the two can be achieved together. Perhaps Turnbull has changed and will soon announce he will follow Trump and ignore the Paris Agreement. Given the public appear to be in favour of such a move that would a smart thing to do. Of course Turnbull has not been smart in a lot of matters in the past so let’s wait and see if he can break that trend.

            30

        • #
          RickWill

          So, let me see now.

          That’s all the current solar plant installations in Australia multiplied by 30.

          No – there is already 14GW of solar installed mostly in the form of rooftop solar. So it means tripling the current level. Essentially every residential rooftop in the NEM spread would require solar panels. In 2018 an additional 1.2GW of rooftop will be installed so getting to 28GW in 20 years is a possibility. It is clear AEMO have used solar capacity factors to arrive at the output. That will likely require substantial upgrade of distribution networks to get the power generated back to the transmission level to avoid automatic shutdown on overvoltage. AEMO are not into fine detail like practical solutions.

          The storage will be in all forms including pumped hydro. Snowy 2 will provide 2GW of the required 17GW. So 8 more of those or 750 HPRs to achieve 90GWh storage. I doubt realistic cost figures were used for the storage. At $5bn a pop 8 more Snowy 2s would be $40bn and that alone is almost twice the top of the estimate range. But there is another minor problem; finding suitable locations for ponds at different elevation in close proximity. The terrain in Australia is not particularly suited to pump storage.

          31

          • #

            I have positively no idea at all where you got that figure of 14GW for rooftop solar. I have heard figures recently of between 7 and 7.5GW, and there is currently (just a tick under) 1GW of solar plants.

            You CANNOT operate a grid for ALL consumers relying on rooftop solar power, and how can I say that more forcefully. There is NO WAY known. It could probably supply a (small) part of the residential sector only. And then they will need a solid grid for all that rooftop solar to attach to, and if that grid goes down, then all that rooftop solar goes down too, so no power for anyone, even those who do have the panels. And then you’ll need power for Sunset to Sunrise, because as soon as you attach batteries to those rooftop solar, that removes them from the grid.

            That’s why I based what I gave for solar on the existing solar plants only.

            Pumped hydro just adds to the perpetual motion machine, power to pump the water up the hill, and then less power on the way back down. Either way, they need the original power to pump it up the hill in the first place, adding to the total needed to perpetuate that perpetual motion.

            Tony.

            110

            • #
              RickWill

              AEMO’s view is that most of the batteries will be purchased by households.

              The path they are aiming for will have grid prices across Australia so expensive that rooftop solar and battery will be the low cost option across the NEM, not just South Australia.

              All the cost estimates are based on achieving the stated 50% CO2 emissions reductions in Queensland and Victoria in combination with the current federal RET.

              The data for the financial modelling includes a penalty price for not achieving a 42TWh RET by 2030. That price is based on $92/MWh now and falls to $69/MWh by 2030. I am not certain how this works as there is no detail on the way the penalty price works in the report but I suspect that is the extra cost to make the RET viable compared with no RET.

              It is quite clear that nothing presented by the ACCC has entered into AEMO’s report. There is an assumption that the NEG will encourage more intermittents and all the AEMO modelling is based on achieving the stated RET. The ISP is presented as the lowest cost path to achieve the RET. There is nothing that focuses “only” on power price.

              00

              • #
                Robber

                Exactly Rick. While Josh/Turnbull keep saying it is technology neutral, rubbish! The guarantee includes an emission reduction target that excludes coal. So any concept of affordable electricity is discarded. It’s a rotten NEG – and it smells:-(
                Will there be any action following the ACCC report that focused on lowering prices?

                00

            • #
              RickWill

              The energy council had a total rooftop solar of 6.4GW at end of 2017:
              https://www.energycouncil.com.au/media/11188/australian-energy-council-solar-report_-january-2018.pdf
              So it will be around 7GW now. It is currently accelerating and there will likely be a flurry in anticipation of the SRET being axed early. In that regard ACCC and AEMO are contradictory. A total solar capacity of 28GW by 2030 is possible but it would need some serious encouragement. That encouragement may simply be bill shock.

              In the ISP data, AEMO show installed rooftop as being 26GW so not much grid scale solar. For their aggressive uptake they have 31GW of rooftop solar by 2030.

              00

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘Existing coal-fired power stations will need to be used for as long as possible before they can be replaced with renewable energy sources, the national market operator has proposed, saying this was the cheapest option in the long term.’ Fin Review

        If this is true then Liddell and Hazelwood will be upgraded.

        50

        • #
          PeterS

          That ought to be a given. In fact of AGL refuses to comply the company should be fined several billion and the directors charged with something for acting against the interests of the nation on a critical part of infrastructure. Sounds too excessive? If one thinks about it I do not think so.

          41

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accords, but the US is spending billions to implement it

    This is what you get when there are so many holdovers from prior administrations, civil servants, not appointees, who do so much of the daily running of everything. They operate largely unchecked for 2 reasons.

    1. Neither Trump nor anyone else has a large enough span of control to manage the entire Federal Bureaucracy to the necessary degree.

    2. In many cases they’re still operating using cookbook rules that have never been changed and as long as they follow those rules their jobs are secure even from criticism.

    It does not help that Trump appointed cabinet level people who bailed out because they had thin skins or couldn’t avoid scandal or were “never Trumpers” in disguise.

    It will take a long time to undo the mess that American government is in.

    70

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes it will take a very long time to stop and undo all the damage that’s still going due to renewables projects, which by the way will continue because the US is still party to the Paris Agreement for a few more years yet until it can officially withdraw. That’s assuming he is still President of course. If not then there is the possibility all the good that Trump has done and is still doing will be lost and it will be back to destroying the US both economically and socially as per the goal of the left.

      10

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    One thing about Africa is that the globalists appear to want to keep it poor.

    While I cant categorically prove this, from anecdotal evidence over 20+ years of observation & study, I do understand how globalists think, and having poor nations govts who will offer up whole populations basically to the highest bidder ( yes, it does go on… ) is great when trying out new drugs or other “interesting” things and you need a group of human guinea pigs who you couldnt get in the West, and who cant say no and no one in the West really cares about….

    “The World Bank’s strategy, generally, is to leapfrog the fossil fuel rung of the “energy ladder” and construct grids powered by zero-emission renewable energy sources in countries with wide-spread systemic poverty. Wind and solar energy is intermittent power reliant on the weather and energy is produced at a higher cost relative to fossil fuels.”

    I read this as “keep them poor by forcing them to take the renewables Australia is trying to get rid of, not real poverty-busting coal power…..”

    The globalists are basically evil – they would prefer to maintain power and privelege over the pooret nations to use them as their play things…..

    30

  • #
    Robber

    Further analysis of the Executive Summary of AEMO’s Integrated System Plan.
    The ISP model used cost-based economic analysis, and integrated system security and reliability considerations, as well as expressed Commonwealth and State Government policies, to identify the transmission investments that will be necessary to support the long-term interests of consumers for safe, secure, reliable electricity, at the least cost. << But not necessarily affordable cost?>>
    In contrast to the history of this sector, overall economic and population growth, and associated growth in demand for power, does not result in increased requirements for supply from the power system. <<Meaning industry is going offshore?>>
    Existing supply sources, particularly thermal resources, are ageing and approaching the end of their technical lives. These resources must be replaced at a time and at the locations required to continue to support a reliable and secure power system and to meet consumer demand for affordable power that also meets public policy requirements. <<ie to meet Paris and beyond.>>
    The generation mix across the power system has a growing proportion of supply from variable renewable energy sources (requiring careful management and balancing of the system), an increasing proportion of non-synchronous generation, and a growing proportion of supply from distributed energy resources (DER), primarily rooftop solar PV.
    Over the 20-year plan period, AEMO anticipates the retirement of a substantial portion of the NEM’s conventional generation fleet. A significant number of coal-fired generators in the NEM have either advised that they are closing or will reach the expected end of technical life in this plan period. Collectively, the generators expected to retire by 2040 produce around 70 terawatt hours (TWh), or 70,000 gigawatt hours (GWh), of energy each year. <<equal to 8,000 MW>> This is close to one-third of total NEM consumption. In addition to providing critical energy production and dispatchable power, conventional generators have also traditionally been relied on to provide essential grid security services, such as inertia, system strength, and frequency control.
    When these resources retire, the modelling shows that retiring coal plants can be most economically replaced with a portfolio of utility-scale renewable generation, storage, DER, flexible thermal capacity, and transmission.
    Within the plan period, under AEMO’s Neutral ISP planning scenario, the analysis projects the lowest cost replacement (based on forecasted costs) for this retiring capacity and energy will be a portfolio of resources, including solar (28GW) <<5,600 MW average but intermittent>>, wind (10.5 GW) <<3,000 MW intermittent>> and storage (17 GW and 90 GWh), complemented by 500 MW of flexible gas plant and transmission investment. This portfolio in total can produce 90 TWh (net) of energy per annum, more than offsetting the energy lost from retiring coal fired generation. <<But no estimate of total increase in costs compared to keeping coal as the foundation?>>
    AEMO’s modelling confirms that the NEM is at a critical point, and infrastructure planning decisions made over the next two years will shape the future of the east coast energy systems for decades to come. <<So unless we quit Paris and all the local subsidies, Australia is doomed to a high cost energy environment for the next 20 years.>>

    20

    • #
      Robber

      Some of the key assumptions and projections in the AEMO Integrated System Plan:
      Assumed retirement dates for coal stations in the 2030-40 time range in date order: Vales Point, Gladstone, Yallourn, Eraring, Bayswater, Tarong, Callide B. No apparent retirement dates for wind/solar generators.
      The modelling considered resource costs, not prices to consumers.
      The ISP focuses on seven scenarios/sensitivities:
      • Two base cases:
       Neutral, and Neutral with storage initiatives.
      • Three additional scenarios:
       Slow change, Fast change, and High DER.
      • Two additional sensitivities to explore key opportunities or risks:
       Increased role for gas, and Early exit of coal-fired generation
      To undertake the ISP modelling, assumptions needed to be made on future emissions levels. All studies except the Fast Change scenario projected a similar trajectory from 2030 as that in the first decade of the plan to 2050. This achieves a reduction of 70% over 2016 emissions by 2050.
      VRET 25% by 2020 and 40% by 2025.
      Queensland Renewables and QRET 50% by 2030.
      Storage developments Snowy 2.0 2025, Battery of the Nation 2033
      AEMO has used projections of reductions in technology costs in its modelling (refer Section 2.7.1). Based on these technology cost projections, the least-cost replacement of energy currently produced by coal is projected to be met through an efficient combination of:
      • Renewable energy – a mixture of diversely located renewable generation (largely solar and wind), including DER.
      • Energy storage – to smooth the production of variable renewable energy and provide backup supply and peaking (up to storage capacity).
      • Backup supply and peaking – GPG to complement renewable energy production.
      • Increased transmission, including interconnection – facilitating the efficient sharing of renewable energy, storage, and backup and firming services.
      Technology costs have been selected from current, reputable public forecasts. CSIRO’s December 2017 projections provide a primary reference.
      As a general proposition, distribution networks were not designed to facilitate bi-directional flows, and the system management tools to safely and seamlessly integrate DER as a reliable resource on to the system at scale are only now being tested.

      What’s missing? Not one mention of assumed trends in wholesale prices. No scenario where the life of coal stations is extended.

      40

  • #
  • #
    OriginalSteve

    The great cooling…..

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-15/cold-weather-photos-there-are-cows-in-nsw-covered-in-frost/9995716?WT.ac=statenews_act

    “Australia’s east coast is shivering through a cold snap this weekend, with cooler temperatures set to remain in some cities into next week.

    The cool weather has stretched from Queensland to Canberra, and also hit parts of the Northern Territory and Tasmania.

    Brisbane woke up to its coolest morning of the year so far at a frosty 5 degrees Celsius, while in Canberra temperatures got as low as -4.8 degrees Celsius overnight.”

    30

  • #
    pat

    Robber -
    thanks for the AEMO run-down. evil.

    reminder – the plan is to replace the petro economy with a Carbon (CO2) economy, on the back of the soon-to-be-implemented(?) Chinese carbon emissions trading system.
    and they plan to do it by looting the pension/super funds:

    11 Jul: Bloomberg: Banks Pivot Toward Greener Finance in Climate Action Push
    By Anna Hirtenstein
    Financial institutions are beginning to get on board with the global fight against climate change, a movement that was until recently the territory of non-profit organizations and environmentalists. Natixis, UBS Group AG and ING Groep NV are among lenders unveiling large-scale environmental finance and investing initiatives as central banks and regulators step up their warnings on climate risk…

    The strategy is to invest in cross-asset portfolios that include ***World Bank bonds, green bonds and environmental, social and governance-focused equity funds…

    Banks are still trailing asset managers such as ***pension funds and ***insurance companies in putting climate concerns into action. Institutional investors with $68.4 trillion under management have already signed up to the Principles for Responsible Investment, pledging to incorporate environmental, social and governance factors, known as ESG, into their investment decisions…
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-11/banks-pivot-toward-greener-finance-in-climate-action-push

    13 Jul: Houston Chronicle: Oil companies break with right over climate change
    By Jordan Blum
    Bellicose actor Alec Baldwin may be an enemy of the right wing with his criticisms and impersonations of President Trump, but no group has infuriated the left more than all-caps ALEC and its far-right political dealings.
    The American Legislative Exchange Council has pushed a conservative agenda within state governments for 45 years, but it’s only within the past decade or so that ALEC emerged as a polarizing political force and household name drafting legislation on topics from the environment and taxes to hot-button issues like gun rights and immigration.

    Placing the spotlight on ALEC — coupled with boycott threats — led to a lot of major companies to cut their ties, including many oil and gas companies. The latest to pull out is the nation’s biggest energy juggernaut, Exxon Mobil, which said it opted to discontinue its membership when it expired at the end of June.

    A sharper rift within ALEC was exposed in December when members such as the conservative Heartland Institute pushed a resolution asking the federal government to drop its stance that climate change is a threat to public health. The nation’s two largest energy companies, Exxon Mobil of Irving and Chevron of San Ramon, Calif., opposed the effort, which ultimately led to the proposal getting nixed, at least for the time being.

    Within the past couple of years, both Exxon Mobil and Chevron have taken steadily stronger stances acknowledging the risks of climate change and implemented some steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution from their operations.

    Chevron remains in ALEC. A company spokesman, however, highlighted Chevron’s opposition to the climate change resolution last week. “Chevron recognizes and shares the concerns of government and the public about climate change and believes it would be more useful to focus on practical, cost-effective action to address climate change risks,” he said.

    European oil majors that have large U.S. operations pulled out of ALEC years earlier. Royal Dutch Shell, which has its U.S. headquarters in Houston, bolted in 2015 over ALEC’s climate change denial.

    Lately, as energy companies have shifted investments to cleaner-burning natural gas, energy companies are talking more about the need to cut their methane emissions. Methane, the main component of natural gas, is a potent greenhouse gas that traps considerably more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, helping to accelerate climate change.

    Last month, Exxon Mobil, Chevron and others said they formed a new methane emissions consortium focused on reducing the release of greenhouse gas, called the Collaboratory for Advancing Methane Science, nicknamed CAMS. The announcement comes less than a week after an academic research report found that U.S. oil and gas operations are releasing far more methane into the atmosphere than the federal government estimates, hurting the case for natural gas as a bridge fuel to a carbon-free future.

    In May, Exxon Mobil pledged a broader effort to reduce methane emissions by 15 percent worldwide by 2020. But that same month, Exxon Mobil’s ALEC ties were again highlighted in public.
    At Exxon Mobil’s annual meeting, Ricky Brooks, a union representative who works at Exxon’s Baytown refinery, took to the microphone to argue that ALEC pushed for weaker worker safety and health standards to save businesses money. In addition to the saftey of workers, Brooks said, “Our reputation could be at stake.”
    Maybe that was the last straw.
    https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Oil-companies-break-with-right-over-climate-change-13071242.php

    00

  • #
    John Watt

    This sort of dilemma simply re-raises the question who has done the most damage to humanity Adolf Hitler or Albert Gore?

    52

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: CarbonPulse: Experts suggest carbon border measures against US as EU, China move closer on climate
    The rest of the world should retaliate against the US’ escalating trade tariffs with carbon border adjustments rather than tit-for-tat countermeasures, according to researchers…

    16 Jul: EU, China renew carbon trading partnership
    The EU and China on Monday signed a strategic partnership that included a renewed commitment to cooperate on carbon markets, a further sign that China intends to go ahead with its national emissions trading scheme despite delays and government restructuring.

    10 Jul: Financial Times: Pessimism grows over expected start date for China carbon trading
    by Emily Feng in Beijing
    Chinese industry players are more pessimistic than ever about when the nation will begin trading in a national carbon market, despite announcements of a limited rollout at the end of last year, according to the largest survey of market expectations.

    Nineteen per cent of those surveyed expected China’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) to be fully functional by 2020 or earlier, down from 47 per cent in 2017’s survey results, according to an annual report by the China Carbon Forum, a non-governmental organisation that tracks carbon trading.
    That number is also down from 2015’s survey, the year China Carbon Forum began asking this question, in which 74 per cent of participants believed a fully functional ETS would begin by 2020 or earlier.

    Exactly half of this year’s survey participants came from industries that will be directly affected by the ETS, a far greater percentage than in previous surveys, likely leading to greater pessimism, according the survey’s authors.
    “We see lower numbers because of greater inclusion of more industry players. Before only those who were optimistic may have responded [to our survey] so this year’s survey may actually better reflect reality,” said Dimitri de Boer of the China Carbon Forum.

    The long-awaited scheme, which is expected to be the world’s largest carbon trading market, was beset by delays after being initially scheduled for launch in 2017.
    Instead, China’s National Development and Reform Commission, a top policymaking body, initiated a three-year development plan last December. Under the plan, limited spot trading of carbon credits would begin in 2020 within the power generation sector only, rather than the eight industrial sectors included in original plans for the scheme.
    https://www.ft.com/content/57ffa25a-840b-11e8-96dd-fa565ec55929

    00

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: EurActiv: China, EU reaffirm Paris climate commitment, vow more cooperation
    By Claire Stam
    China and the European Union on Monday reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris climate change pact and called other signatories to do the same, saying action against rising global temperatures had become more important than ever…

    In a joint communique (LINK) on Monday, the two sides stopped short of criticising the United States, but said the deal proved that “multilateralism can succeed in building fair and effective solutions to the most critical global problems of our time.”

    The two sides said they remained committed to creating a mechanism to transfer $100 billion a year from richer to poorer nations to help them adapt to climate change. The fund has been a major bone of contention for the United States.
    They also promised to work closely together to promote an effective solution to the problem of aviation and shipping emissions, and consider further ways to cooperate in carbon emissions trading…

    Jo Leinen, Member of the European Parliament (Social Democrats, Germany), Chair of China delegation said that the joint commitment by the EU and China is a vital message ahead of this year’s climate summit in Poland.
    “They need to show their responsibility not only through words and handshake but through strong actions and concrete emission reductions. Both the EU and China need to be constructive in finalising the Paris rulebook. They need to promote the implementation of the Climate Accord at negotiation level just as actively as at political level,” he said in a statement while pointing out that the joint statement will motivate others to follow.

    “The EU-China alliance should become a broader coalition of governments and non-state actors that take climate action forward. EU and China can benefit from deeper cooperation on clean energy and emission trading,” the MEP said.

    Commenting on the joint declaration, Wendel Trio, Director of Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe said that this statement is an important milestone to ensure the urgently needed substantial increase in global climate action.
    “Building on the overachievement of their existing targets, and the momentum in the EU in support of going well beyond the Paris pledge increased cooperation on climate action between the EU and China can propel the global zero carbon transition. We call upon the two countries to put their statements into action and scale up their respective Paris climate pledges in order to be able to reach the long-term commitment of the Paris Agreement to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C,” he said.

    Li Shuo, Senior Climate Policy Advisor at Greenpeace China said that the initiative reaffirms the resolve of Beijing and Brussels to take the Paris Agreement forward in this crucial year for climate diplomacy.
    “What gets the pair together isn’t just Trump – China and the EU understand the opportunities offered by a clean and climate safe world,” he said.

    As climate impacts start to bite across the world, the need to act on climate change is more urgent than ever, Li Shuo also stressed.
    “To demonstrate their alignment is more than just a marriage of convenience and to show a genuine will to lead, both sides must enhance their climate targets for 2030. Today should be the first step in that direction,” he said.
    https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/news/china-eu-reaffirm-paris-climate-commitment-vow-more-cooperation/

    00

  • #
    pat

    the EU’s climate partner:

    16 Jul: Radio Free Asia: China’s Coal Use Climbs Despite Pollution Plans
    An analysis by Michael Lelyveld
    China’s coal consumption appears to be rising at a rapid rate in 2018, erasing several years of low growth and environmental restraint.
    In the first five months of the year, China used 870 million metric tons of “thermal” coal, a 12-percent increase from a year earlier, the government’s top planning agency said on June 21.
    The growth rate was the highest since 2011, said the website of the official Economic Daily, citing a statement by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).

    The volume estimate is only for thermal coal, used for power and heat, other websites reported. The tonnage figure also covered only coal used to generate electricity, the official English-language China Daily said…

    If the country continues the 12-percent growth pace through the entire year for all coal use, consumption would tie the record mark of 4.24 billion tons set in 2013, based on calculations from National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) data.
    While the NBS has yet to release final figures on total tonnage for either 2016 or 2017, it has estimated that coal consumption rose 0.4 percent last year, posting the first increase in four years.
    The consequences for greenhouse gas emissions and climate change could be significant…

    China produced 46.4 percent of the world’s coal and consumed 50.7 percent of the global total last year, based on energy equivalent estimates by BP Statistical Review of World Energy.
    The country was by far the world’s largest source of energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, accounting for 27.6 percent, the annual review estimated.
    China’s CO2 emissions rose 1.6 percent in 2017 after declining in the previous two years, it said…

    In a lengthy Xinhua summary, NPC Standing Committee Chairman Li Zhanshu cited “unprecedented strength and pragmatic measures” in fighting air pollution, but also problems “caused by structural layout and slack law enforcement and supervision.”
    The report singled out a high concentration of diesel-powered vehicles in coastal Shandong province and a full year of fabricated environmental readings from Linfen City in northern Shanxi province.
    But there appeared to be no mention of the resurgent growth of coal…

    In the first four months, production rose by 60 million tons in the main provincial-level coal centers of Shaanxi, Shanxi, and Inner Mongolia. The NDRC has given their mines a green light for increases of 250 million tons this year to keep already-high prices from climbing further…

    Electricity consumption jumped 9.4 percent in the first half of the year, rising eight percent in June from a year earlier, the NEA said…
    At the start of the year, the double-digit growth of gas use was expected to reduce coal consumption. Instead, it has only added to energy consumption as demand for both fuels remains high.
    In the first five months of the year, gas consumption climbed 17.6 percent, the NDRC said…
    “China is straining to meet rising gas demand, so there’s not really much ability to use more gas in the short term to meet rising growth,” said Herberg.
    “So any substantial rise in electricity demand tends to default to more coal-fired power,” he said.

    Several provinces have warned of summer electricity shortages, keeping coal demand high…

    The statistics suggest that steelmakers simply shifted their output to other parts of the country to avoid smog controls in the northeast, setting a series of production records while cashing in on high prices from market reactions to the winter limits.
    Despite international furor over tariffs and China’s production, the country’s output of crude steel rose from 74 million tons in March to nearly 77 million tons in April before hitting another all-time monthly high of more than 81 million tons in May.
    The government has been studiously silent about the new production records while it is locked in a tariff standoff with the United States that started with complaints about steel.

    In a rare admission, the NDRC conceded last month that it has had trouble reining in China’s steelmakers, particularly producers of substandard reinforcing bars…

    The surge in coal growth coincides with the release of a new three-year environmental action plan on June 25, laying out new targets and steps to control air pollution through 2020…
    But it is unclear how the new targets can be reconciled with the current increases in coal use. Genuine reductions in pollution seem unlikely unless the major source of pollution is curbed.
    The three-year plan also seems to focus on smog, paying little attention to carbon emissions and climate change…
    https://www.rfa.org/english/commentaries/energy_watch/chinas-coal-use-climbs-despite-pollution-plans-07162018102732.html

    00

    • #
      pat

      living in La La Land:

      17 Jul: ClimateChangeNews: Fragile China-EU climate pact must be backed by action
      Leaders overcame differences on climate. But in the EU-China relationship, trouble is never far away
      By Léa Pilsner
      (Léa Pilsner is a researcher at E3G in Brussels)
      The text commits both actors to global leadership on climate action, in a wide variety of areas ranging from long-term climate strategies, to clean energy innovation, investment, cities and emissions trading…

      Concretely, the pair agreed to promote the “effective implementation of the Paris Agreement in all its aspects” but also to ensure nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and pre-2020 commitments on climate are implemented, sufficient climate finance is unlocked prior to 2025 and support for the upcoming COP24 and the 2018 Talanoa Dialogue. Domestically the EU and China aligned further by pledging to make sure their NDCs are effectively implemented and to communicate their long-term climate strategies, currently under development…

      In previous years, the EU-China climate relationship has been hindered by their competing interests in clean tech markets, eventually leading to a trade dispute over solar panels in 2012 that remains a source of controversy. The EU is still distrustful of China’s willingness to open up its economy and provide what it considers a level-playing field for European companies and investments. The 2017 EU-China summit failed to agree a final communique as a result of such economic differences.

      This year, the EU and China showed their capacity to overcome these issues and instead build on their growing alignment in these fields. Climate action is now enshrined at the centre of the EU-China relationship, and the agreement signals a significant deepening of cooperation, ranging from formulating their long-term climate strategies together, supporting China’s recently launched national Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), energy labelling, promoting low emissions vehicles and exchanging experience on low-carbon cities…

      But this progress is fragile. Real climate leadership must translate into protecting climate cooperation from the usual ebb and flow of EU-China relations, so that climate cooperation is not yet again disrupted as a result of economic or trade disagreements…

      The EU and China passed the test this time. Their domestic alignment on energy and sustainability makes for a natural if not easy partnership. The real test, however, will come from translating this broad agenda of collaboration into tangible commitments to raise climate ambition – and ultimately change the emissions trajectory of both actors.
      http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/07/17/fragile-china-eu-climate-pact-must-backed-action/

      00

  • #
    pat

    16 Jul: European Commission Press Release: EU-China Summit: deepening the strategic global partnership
    Beijing – The 20th Summit between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China held today in Beijing has underlined that this partnership has reached a new level of importance for our own citizens, for our respective neighbouring regions and for the international community more broadly.

    President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker and President of the European Council Donald Tusk represented the European Union at the Summit. The People’s Republic of China was represented by Premier Li Keqiang. European Commission Vice-President for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness, Jyrki Katainen, Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström, and Transport Commissioner Violeta Bulc also attended the Summit. President Tusk and President Juncker also met with the President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping.

    “I have always been a strong believer in the potential of the EU-China partnership. And in today’s world that partnership is more important than ever before. Our cooperation simply makes sense”, said the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker. “Europe is China’s largest trading partner and China is our second largest. The trade in goods between us is worth over €1.5 billion every single day. But we also know that we can do so much more. This is why it is so important that today we have made progress on the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment through a first exchange of offers on market access, and towards an agreement on Geographical Indications. That shows that we want to create more opportunities for people in China and in Europe.”
    The full remarks of President Juncker at the press conference following the Summit are available online (LINK)…

    This 20th Summit demonstrates the many ways in which the European Union and China are concretely strengthening what is already a comprehensive relationship. In addition to the Joint Statement, a number of other concrete deliverables were agreed, including:
    a Leaders’ Statement on Climate Change and Clean Energy;
    an exchange of offers on the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment;
    a Partnership Agreement on Oceans;
    a Memorandum of Understanding on Circular Economy Cooperation;
    a Memorandum of Understanding to Enhance Cooperation on Emissions Trading…ETC

    Working together for a more sustainable planet

    In the Leaders’ statement on climate change and clean energy (LINK), the European Union and China have committed to step up their cooperation towards low greenhouse gas emission economies and the implementation of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change…

    ***Vice-President Katainen and the Minister of Ecology and Environment, Li Ganjie*, also signed the Memorandum of Understanding to Enhance Cooperation on Emissions Trading, which acknowledges the significant potential of emissions trading to contribute to a low carbon economy and further enhances the cooperation of the two largest emission trading systems of the world…ETC
    http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4521_en.htm

    00

    • #
      Robin Guenier

      None of this should not be taken at face value. China completely outmanoeuvred the West in pre-Paris negotiations, getting essentially all it wanted: for example, it continues (absurdly) to be classed as a developing country and therefore is exempt from any obligation – legal, moral or political – to reduce its GHG emissions and it’s only developed countries that are obliged to deliver the $100 billion a year that was so rashly promised after the Copenhagen debacle. China hasn’t the slightest intention of giving all that up. That EurActiv statement (see your post #29 above) should be read very carefully in that context: of course China is committed to the hopelessly one-sided Paris Agreement. No wonder for example it’s keen to create a mechanism to transfer that $100 billion a year: it’s a potential recipient. This EU-China climate partnership of which Juncker and Tusk seem to be so proud is no more meaningful than Obama’s 2014 US-China climate alliance.

      Why are the West’s negotiators so eager to allow China to fool them like this?

      30

  • #
    pat

    comment in moderation re: ClimateChangeNews: Fragile China-EU climate pact must be backed by action

    17 Jul: ClimateChangeNews: How the Paris Agreement can take on fossil fuel supply
    The UN deal doesn’t mention coal, oil or gas, but it can still be used to limit their extraction
    By Georgia Piggot and Peter Erickson
    (Georgia Piggot and Peter Erickson are staff scientists at the Stockholm Environment Institute)
    The idea governments and industry need to limit the extraction of fossil fuels to avoid dangerous global warming is starting to move from the fringe to the mainstream of climate change policy-making…

    But climate change is a global problem, and fossil fuels are traded internationally. So policies to constrain fossil fuel supply, much like carbon pricing policies to limit fossil fuel use, are most effective if they are done collectively…

    We provide some answers in a new paper in Climate Policy (LINK). We show that despite the fact that the Paris Agreement doesn’t mention fossil fuels, there are plenty of options for addressing oil, gas, and coal development within the current architecture of the agreement. For example, countries could report on policies to phase-down fossil fuel production in their NDCs and long-term strategies, and this could be tracked through the agreement’s global “stocktake” process…

    There is a growing appetite to tackle fossil fuel supply at the UN-level. Several countries raised this topic at the Talanoa Dialogue on raising ambition in Bonn this May. Countries talked about oil exploration bans and coal phase-outs, as well as efforts to reform and redirect fossil fuel finance and subsidies.

    The next step is for leading countries to form a ‘coalition of the willing’ to address fossil fuel supply at the intergovernmental level. The Powering Past Coal Alliance (LINK) – which aims to phase out coal-fired power plants – provides a useful model for what a group focused on fossil fuel extraction could look like…

    We have to wean ourselves off coal, oil, and [ultimately] natural gas if we are going to solve the climate crisis. Though some countries remain entangled in fossil fuel development, others are beginning to show the leadership needed to begin bringing fossil fuel production, as well as consumption, in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/07/17/paris-agreement-can-take-fossil-fuel-supply/

    00

    • #
      Robin Guenier

      The next step is for leading countries to form a ‘coalition of the willing’ to address fossil fuel supply at the intergovernmental level.

      There isn’t the remotest change of that happening. Comments like this are a complete waste of time.

      20

  • #
    pat

    17 Jul: Bloomberg: Global Economy’s Future Is Electric, But Still Dirty, IEA Says
    By Anna Hirtenstein
    Renewables investment fell 7% to $298 billion in 2017
    Fossil fuels in energy mix rose for first time since 2014
    More of the world will run on electricity in the future, but most of the power won’t be clean.
    That’s the key message from the International Energy Agency’s latest report on investment trends released Tuesday. The Paris-based organization said that electricity generation attracted more capital than oil and natural gas for the second year in a row, but investment in renewables declined and is expected to keep falling…

    The electricity industry attracted $750 billion in 2017, thanks to robust spending on grids. That’s compared with $715 billion that flowed into oil and gas supply. About $298 billion was invested in renewable power generation, down 7 percent from the previous year…

    The share of fossil fuels in the global energy supply rose for the first time since 2014 to just under 60 percent, as spending rose in oil and gas and new power plants were built out in Asia. The sector attracted $132 billion of investment…

    Globally, coal has declined, but there are still at least 30 gigawatts of new plants about to be constructed, largely in developing countries. The average age of a coal plant in Asia is 11 years old, compared to ***40 in Europe and the U.S., so existing plants will also be operating for decades to come…
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-17/global-economy-s-future-is-electric-but-still-dirty-iea-says

    go to the International Energy Agency website to download the report/s.

    00

  • #
    pat

    TOTALLY FakeNewsMSM:

    16 Jul: ABC America: Public backs action on global warming – but with cost concerns and muted urgency (POLLBy Gary Langer
    Public awareness of global warming is up and support for action is broad, with eight in 10 Americans saying the federal government should try to achieve the same deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions called for in the international treaty rejected by Donald Trump.

    Sixty-one percent in a new national survey also say the federal government should be doing “a great deal” or “a lot” about global warming, up 8 points since 2015 to the most since 2009. A mere 10 percent say the government in fact is doing that much – down 5 points in three years…
    LINK See PDF for full results, charts and tables

    The random-sample survey was produced by ABC News, Stanford University’s Political Psychology Research Group and Resources for the Future, a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank focused on economic, environmental, energy and natural resource issues, with design, management and analysis for ABC by Langer Research Associates. It extends more than 20 years of research into attitudes on global warming by the Political Psychology Research Group at Stanford University — previously at Ohio State University — led by Prof. Jon Krosnick…
    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/public-backs-action-global-warming-cost-concerns-muted/story?id=56549874

    00

  • #
    pat

    Bloomberg stated “About $298 billion was invested in renewable power generation, down 7 percent from the previous year”

    Reuters states: “investment in energy efficiency and renewables went down by 3 percent last year” without providing a dollar figure!

    is Reuters spinning, as usual? haven’t got time to check the report:

    17 Jul: Reuters: Electricity investments surpass oil, gas for second year running: IEA
    by Nina Chestney
    Many countries are having to invest more in upgrading or building new power networks ***to balance out demand and supply swings due to the rise of solar and wind power and electric vehicles…

    Despite rising renewable energy production, investment in energy efficiency and renewables went down by 3 percent last year after several years of growth and could decline further this year, the IEA said…
    “Such a decline in global investment for renewables and energy efficiency combined is worrying,” said Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director.
    “This could threaten the expansion of clean energy needed to meet energy security, climate and clean air goals. While we would need this investment to go up rapidly, it is disappointing to find that it might be falling this year,” he added…

    The United States’ shale industry is also at a turning point after a long period of operating in a weak financial environment.
    “The industry appears on track to achieve positive free cash flow for the first time ever this year, turning into a more mature and financially solid industry while production is growing at its fastest pace ever,” Birol said…

    Final investment decisions for new coal-fired plants declined for a second year running, but the global coal fleet continued to expand in 2017, mostly due to markets in ****Asia.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iea-energy-investment/electricity-investments-surpass-oil-gas-for-second-year-running-iea-idUSKBN1K70KB

    00

  • #
    pat

    turn off everything…nuttier and nuttier:

    17 Jul: Guardian: Our phones and gadgets are now endangering the planet
    The energy used in our digital consumption is set to have a bigger impact on global warming than the entire aviation industry
    by John Harris
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/17/internet-climate-carbon-footprint-data-centres

    10

  • #
    Dave in the States

    Obama and his henchmen left a lot of turds baked into the cake.

    10

  • #
    angry

    Simple.

    The US should immediately cease supplying funds to the anti human world bank.

    00