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

Engineers warn 55% renewables will add $1400 to electricity bills in Australia

Green genius: Pay $1400 a year to not stop any storms

Finally some veteran engineers checked the Labor Party 50% renewable plan and the AEMO “65% scenarios”. Unlike others, their study that did not involve magical assumptions that the cost of renewables would dramatically fall. Instead they used “actual costs” and found the price of electricity will rise “84%” and cheap coal power will be forced out of business (just like what we also found here). The engineers include Barry Murphy, former managing director and chairman of Caltex. Robert Barr, an electrical engineer and academic at University of Wollongong. If only Kevin Rudd had asked them in 2007.

Engineers warn of bill shock under green energy surge

Adam Creighton, Economics Editor, The Australian

Electricity bills will soar and gas and coal-fired power stations will close if the share of wind and solar generation increases dramat­ically, engineers have warned after analysing the nation’s ­energy supply.

It found bills were likely to soar 84 per cent, or about $1400 a year, for the typical household, if wind and solar power supplied 55 per cent of the national electricity market.

A quarter of Australian rooftops have solar, and we need 40 times the current solar?

The AEMO forecast would require more than a 40-fold increase in the solar capacity and around a tripling of the number of wind turbines.

 Killer duck curve coming.

Cost of electricity in Australia, Renewables. Labor, AEMO.

Not only is this pointless but it’s 25 times more expensive than it has to be

The Abbott “Direct Action” auctions cost taxpayers about $12-14 per ton of CO2 reduction. Yet Labor-Green-and-Turnbull continuously pick the wildly inefficient and expensive pro-renewables option. So does the climate-change activist Audrey Zibelman who manages our AEMO. They all say they want to reduce CO2, yet they all chose to enrich the renewables vested interests instead.

Stupid or suspicious?

The AEMO scenario of 65 per cent renewable energy by 2040 would reduce emissions at a cost of $365 a tonne of carbon dioxide, the study estimated. Replacing coal-fired power generation with nuclear power would reduce emissions by a far greater amount at an abatement cost of $27.50 a tonne. The Gillard government’s ill-fated carbon tax envisaged a tax of $29 a tonne.  [Jo notes that the Gillard Labor carbon price ended up being $5310 per ton. ]

Follow the money.

Also this week: the PM, Scott Morrison, noted that Texans were allowed to explore for gas, unlike people in NSW and Victoria, and electricity prices were a “third lower” there.

UPDATE Thanks to Pat: Report linked here from August 2018 at bottom of the 4 pages:

Electric Power Consulting: National Electricity Market (NEM) Model
Reliable and Affordable Electric Power Generation Booklet
This report is based on modelling undertaken with the EPC NEM generation mix model. Download a copy of the 4 page “Reliable and Affordable Electric Power Generation” booklet here: Booklet (LINK)

Contributing Authors:
Dr Robert Barr AM BE(Hons) ME PhD FIE(Aust) CPEng , Director Electric Power Consulting Pty Ltd
Barry Murphy BScApp, BE(Chem) CSci MBA FIChemE FTSE FAICD, Former Chairman & CEO Caltex Australia
Dr Mark Ho PhD, President Australian Nuclear Association
Martin H Thomas AM FTSE HonFIEAust HonFAIE
Barrie Hill BE MiMechE MIPENZ FIE(Aust), Managing Director SMR Nuclear Technology Pty Ltd

https://epc.com.au/index.php/nem-model/

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (62 votes cast)
Engineers warn 55% renewables will add $1400 to electricity bills in Australia, 9.5 out of 10 based on 62 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/yd6o642k

133 comments to Engineers warn 55% renewables will add $1400 to electricity bills in Australia

  • #
    Serp

    This can only deteriorate.

    Get rid of all the parasites please.

    Undo the RET legislation as a priority.

    331

    • #
      Geoff

      What happens if the sun refuses to co-operate with the warmistas? Putting up panels everywhere right before a solar minimum is not very bright!

      Then there are those who want electric cars. The nightly power refill is mind boggling on 1 Billion cars, (assuming we can afford the required A$10k subsidy on every vehicle). Just one more wet fantasy. Then there are the trucks etc.

      All of this can be calculated by hand on an A8 note book.

      The average politician seems unable to add or multiply.

      270

    • #
      Phillip Bratby

      The stupidity of politicians is at an unprecedented level.

      30

      • #
        Lionell Griffith

        I suggest the politicians are as stupid as ever. They just feel it is no longer necessary to pretend they have any common sense. This is largely because they don’t have to pay for the consequences of their stupid behavior. If they actually had to pay, their behavior would soon stop.

        Somehow We the People have to learn how to tell them NO and make it stick. Otherwise, the stupidity will continue until there is nothing left worth having.

        40

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    Only $1,400 pa?

    At 55% renewables I would have expected much more.

    202

  • #
    Bodge it an scarpa

    In coming up with the$1400 figure, did the engineers take into account that most of the wind turbines currently in service would have reached the end of their use by date and would require replacement at the cost of Billions more by 2040?

    271

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    Horrible situation!

    100

  • #
    pat

    jo, not sure if everything is in here, but it’s a start:

    booklet (PDF) is dated August 2018 at bottom of the 4 pages linked:

    Electric Power Consulting: National Electricity Market (NEM) Model
    Reliable and Affordable Electric Power Generation Booklet
    This report is based on modelling undertaken with the EPC NEM generation mix model. Download a copy of the 4 page “Reliable and Affordable Electric Power Generation” booklet here: Booklet (LINK)

    Contributing Authors:
    Dr Robert Barr AM BE(Hons) ME PhD FIE(Aust) CPEng , Director Electric Power Consulting Pty Ltd
    Barry Murphy BScApp, BE(Chem) CSci MBA FIChemE FTSE FAICD, Former Chairman & CEO Caltex Australia
    Dr Mark Ho PhD, President Australian Nuclear Association
    Martin H Thomas AM FTSE HonFIEAust HonFAIE
    Barrie Hill BE MiMechE MIPENZ FIE(Aust), Managing Director SMR Nuclear Technology Pty Ltd
    https://epc.com.au/index.php/nem-model/

    160

    • #
      TedM

      Useful link Pat. Thanks.

      60

    • #

      Very helpful link Pat! Thank you. I will add that link to the post.

      It clearly states their assumptions. The study is based on one year of NEM cost data Jan 17-Jan 18 for different generation types.

      50

    • #

      Of the authors I have met Martin Thomas who is a very knowledgeable electric engineer and was a partner in an engineering consulting company. He has given talks on Nuclear energy and has visited nuclear power stations overseas. So the author panel is weighted towards nuclear. I admit would like to see some nuclear power stations here. It is my belief from reading about nuclear technology in Finland and South Korea that the cost of nuclear power is exaggerated. In Finland a nuclear power stations has been more than doubled in capacity with relatively minor modifications (eg increasing the pressure in the boilers, adding additional steam turbines, better instrumentation and computer control. This has reduced the capital cost per unit of output. Further, they have obtained licence to extend the life to 60 years and may extend the life further. In South Korea they are working on 4th & 5th generation nuclear reactors which can be built in transportable units to speed installation time to one year. This will substantially lower capital costs.
      However, the graphs are wrong to have emissions on one of the scales. CO2 is not a pollutant and the production of CO2 should not be considered an emission. It seems to me that none of the authors understands the climate scam. If the priority on renewables is removed, subsidies are removed and contracts take in account reliablity of supply (eg penalise wind and solar if they can not meet contracted supply over one hour or one day for large industrial customers) then coal fired power stations will be more viable and investment on upgrading existing stations or building new ones can be made.
      Liddell power station is hindered by poor quality coal mills which operate below the original design capacity. replacing the coal mills for around $150M would increase the output of the station, increase the availablity to the over 90% achieved by Qld coal fired power stations. If the Finns can increase the pressure capability of boilers at Nuclear plants it could be possible to uprate some of the existing older coal boiler units and replace turbines. There are older coal fired power stations that have had lives over 80 years. The present systems giving priority for wind and solar has meant no investment on existing stations, a run down of maintenance, more break downs and reduced life. Like your car, if you do not keep up maintenance (eg the breaks, engine oil, tyres etc)there will be a major break down which could be the end costing more than expected. AGL is doing that at Liddell. They may even have an insurance policy hoping that something like an explosion or fire will help their short term bottom line and give management a bonus.

      40

  • #
    pat

    another little problem:

    Korea JoongAng Daily is the English language version of the South Korean national daily newspaper JoongAng Ilbo. It is one of three English-language daily newspapers in South Korea…

    PIC: 5 Sept: Korea Joongang Daily: Environments hurt by solar sites
    Power generation plants cause problems for farmers below
    BY CHOI JONG-KWON, PARK JIN-HO
    PIC: A two-meter (6.5 feet) pit formed near a solar power generation facility in the village of Seongjae-1 Ochang-eup, Cheongju, North Chungcheong, after heavy rainfall recently. Landslides have exposed the steel frame of the structure.
    Shin’s field is just below a 29,000 square meter (312,000 square feet) solar power generation facility atop a mountain in the agricultural town of Ochang-eup. This solar facility, carved into the ridges of a mountain overlooking farmland, is two months away from opening. Hundreds of solar panels are installed…

    Rainwater streaming down the mountainside carved pits and ravines in the slopes, and in some places, steel frames that were sunk some 1.5 meters into the ground have been exposed…
    But the same company is building a solar power generation facility one village away and it is plagued by similar problems. A two-meter pit has formed by the construction site, while runoff water from the slopes has inundated farmland below…

    On Aug. 29, a solar power plant construction site in Galmal-eup in Cheorwon County, Gangwon, suffered from a major landslide after a 10-meter crack in an embankment…
    On Aug. 3, a solar power facility on a hill in Maejeon-myeon, Cheongdo County, in North Gyeongsang, collapsed partly after a landslide.
    Residents of the Seongjae area in Cheongju have blamed the city government for granting permission to construct solar power generation facilities so near farmland…
    http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=3052790

    120

  • #
    toorightmate

    I believe there is a basic flaw in the methodology – SUBSIDIES.
    Subsidies for the current mix are cruelling people, businesses and taking business offshore because of the cost of power.
    With an increase mix, the subsidies HAVE TO FURTHER INCREASE. At 55%, the average Jo Blow will not have sufficient money to cover basic living costs. When this occurs the system is unworkable.
    Plus, there will be no jobs (industry will have left the land of Qz).
    When will the craziness be realized?

    These engineers and modellers are failing to realize the fatal flaws in their ponderings and wanderings.

    180

  • #
    pat

    from cached version:

    5 Sept: Edie.net: Report: Smart technology could reduce annual cost of decarbonising homes by £6.9bn
    by Sarah George
    Technologies which improve household energy flexibility have the potential to cut the annual cost of decarbonising Britain’s housing stock by almost £7bn, according to a new joint report from Imperial College London (ICL) and OVO Energy.
    The report, released today (5 September) and entitled Blueprint for a Post-Carbon Society, considers three potential trajectories for the future of the UK’s energy network, all with varying amounts of residential energy flexibility factored in.

    In the most ambitious of the three decarbonisation scenarios, which relies on 93% of the nation’s energy being derived from renewables, the use of residential flexible technologies such as smart electric vehicle (EV) charging, smart electric heating and in-home battery storage was found to save the UK energy system £6.9bn overall.

    The savings were calculated as £1.1bn from smart EV charging, £3.5bn from vehicle-to-grid (V2G) EV charging, £3.9bn from smart heating systems and £2.9bn from in-home batteries. Cost savings were calculated against a ‘business as usual’ scenario relying on fossil fuel-based power generation. Indeed, the report speculates that the findings serve as proof that smart electric heat can provide enough flexibility to enable green generation from wind and solar alone, displacing the need for nuclear generation and carbon capture and storage (CCS).

    The report claims that the savings realised would be equivalent to a £256 saving on the average household energy bill each year. The scenario relies on the uptake of 25 million EVs and 21 million electric heating units by 2040 – a trajectory which the report dubs “ambitious but achievable”.

    Nonetheless, smart technologies were still found to reduce the national cost of decarbonisation by £5.6bn annually under a less ambitious scenario which relies on a grid carbon density of 50g per kWh.
    “Flexible storage, located near consumption and found in EVs, smart electric heating and home energy storage devices offer a perfect solution to ease grid capacity issues and will limit the need for expensive grid upgrades and reinforcements,” the report states.
    “The energy storage found in these behind-the-meter (BTM) devices can act like an energy reservoir, soaking up cheaper renewable power that can then be used when required or released back into the grid at times of peak demand.”

    OVO Energy’s director of strategy Toby Ferenczi said the findings served to prove that smart technologies are “absolutely critical to bringing down emissions and powering the future sustainably”.
    Indeed, the cost of generating energy from wind and solar in the UK is expected to halve by 2040, with the expected future power system volatility set to create more economic opportunities for flexible energy sources and storage capacity.

    Low-carbon homes
    The OVO and ICL report comes as the Renewable Energy Association (REA) is urging ministers to scrap the “single-phase” electricity supply system for new homes, in a bid to encourage the uptake of solar arrays, heat pumps and electric vehicles.
    The REA believes that a three-phase system will be necessary to support the uptake of EVs, in-home battery storage units and smart heating, which it claims would “overload” the existing system.
    https://www.edie.net/news/6/Report–Smart-technology-could-reduce-annual-cost-of-decarbonising-homes-by–6-9bn/

    re the launch, but no report to download as yet:

    5 Sept: Imperial College: A blueprint for a post-carbon society
    Energy Futures Lab and OVO Energy present an event to launch the new report, A blueprint for a post-carbon society.
    http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/administration/energyfutureslab/eventssummary/event_9-8-2018-13-8-15

    21

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      If you double the electrical load per house, you have to increase infrastructure spend, but also need the power to actually do all this – not sure how windmills and a few solar cells in cold & wet europe will work…..

      60

  • #
    pat

    from cached version – ***subsidy-free was just a prediction:

    4 Sept: Edie.net: 40% of solar installers ‘set to leave UK amid subsidy cuts’
    by Sarah George
    Companies accounting for more than 40% of the UK’s solar installation industry could leave the national market if the Government does not extend the export tariff and provide a replacement for the Feed-in Tariff (FiT) scheme.
    That is the key conclusion of new research from the Renewable Energy Consumer Code (RECC) – a subsidiary of the Renewable Energy Association (REA) which more than 1,500 renewable installer companies are members of.
    The finding comes after the RECC surveyed 140 of its members, with half of the respondents claiming that they would cut at least 75% of their workforce if the Government fails to continue an export tariff once the FiT scheme ends next March…
    Overall, 78% of respondents to the RECC survey said they were considering reducing their staff levels if the Government’s current solar proposals (LINK) are carried out in full…
    Estimates suggest that around 9,000 roles are believed to have been lost when the FiT scheme was reduced in 2016…

    The organisations have also suggested that tax support previously withdrawn as ‘double subsidy’ should be re-introduced to bridge the gap between the closure of the FiT scheme and ***the predicted subsidy-free renewables “revolution”…

    The study comes shortly after more than 200 stakeholders in the UK’s solar sector, including energy companies, NGOs and city leaders, wrote a joint letter (LINK) to Energy Minister Claire Perry calling for the extension of the export tariff…
    Signatories of the document, including representatives from E.ON, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, urged ministers to confirm the renewal of the tariff post-Brexit as a “matter of urgency”. They claimed that the closure of the export tariff would expose small solar generators to “very nascent markets that currently lack regulatory foundations”, putting them at risk of subsidising the commercial electricity sector without payment.

    London Mayor Sadiq Khan has also penned a similar request to Perry, claiming he was “deeply concerned” that Government proposals to end the FiT scheme would hamper his own efforts to boost deployment of solar technology in the capital…
    https://www.edie.net/news/10/40–of-solar-installers–set-to-leave-UK-amid-subsidy-cuts-/

    70

    • #
      TedM

      ” 40% of solar installers set to leave UK amid subsidy cuts” by Sarah George”
      It happened in Germany, then China now UK, hopefully next Oz.

      120

    • #
      William

      I, being perhaps somewhat masochistic, spend some time at the Fairfax comments sites. It is a sobering experience reading the comments on climate change articles – the sheer blinkered stupidity of many there is staggering. They believe that AGW is solely the reason for climate change and that it is catastrophic. They believe that solar and wind are the answer and that both are reliable, economic and environmentally friendly. They believe that solar and wind are cheaper than coal – but they still argue for subsidies for renewables and penalties for coal. They refuse to believe anything about the failing wind and solar markets in Germany and China.

      So as to the question, when will we escape this period of peak stupid? It won’t be soon, and it won’t be before we have more financial and industrial pain.

      231

      • #
        NoFixedAddress

        William

        Thank you for doing what I could not do.

        Nowadays I am flat out calling in here at Jo’s site because it is just too depressing.

        I think we should shut down the entire so called education system.

        What did we use before candles? Electricity!

        120

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        William & NoFixedAddress

        The Greens in whatever form are frantically trying to keep momentum going. They represent a small but incredibly noisy group trying to influence the majority. If most people believed the Fairfax press why has its circulation dropped to the point where it was sold off?

        Their trick is to isolate the wholesale price of electricity and show that renewables are ‘cheaper’ than gas or coal, but ignoring the $80-85 REC subsidy. That means wind electricity sold at $45 a MWh + $85 works out about 3 times what we used to pay for old style coal fired. Coal is disupted by renewables so its costs go up to the benefit of the renewables suppliers only.

        The tide is turning; Trump has switched the USA towards reliable methods (with a few States holding out), Both England and Germany have reduced subsidies, so has Spain and China, Canada is switching with Ontario and Altona telling the Trudeau boy to get lost. Even our Federal Govt. seems to be edging towards lower costs rather than emissions (which they may not get with renewables anyway).

        The longer Bill Shorten keeps sprouting nonsense about renewables being cheaper, the less likely he is to win the next election. The public are noticing that renewables and price rises go together.

        130

      • #
        yarpos

        All true but I wonder how representative rabid greenie Fairfax commentors are of the general population. I think BS detectors have been going off now for a while in the general population. Maybe I am being overly optimistic.

        60

        • #
          William

          yarpos, I doubt the Fairfax Collective represents the view of most of the population these days, the problem is that the SMH and its sister publications still trade on their past reputations, and most politicians and business leaders still rely on them and the ABC for their news. It is those leaders *cough*, who read Fairfax Print/Digital publications and watch the ABC and who won’t deign to read any publications they feel are beneath them, who are making the decisions.

          50

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        When the power goes off, the ignorant who know nothing about using their brains to survive ( basic survival skills, camping skills, bushcraft ) will die first.

        There is a form of natural balance in all this to be achieved…..

        40

      • #
        Mal

        How far away are we from the tipping point for peak stupidity.
        Once we reach it, there will be catastrophic economic damage from which we will not recover.
        Probably will occur once Liddel closes down.
        If labor gets in, the next election, it will be locked in.

        60

      • #
        Ted O'Brien

        William, remember that those comments are filtered. Before they are published they must be approved by the moderators.

        It would be very interesting to see the comments that were rejected. Including mine.

        They would be all on record, and could be dug up and published in the future.

        30

        • #
          William

          Surprisingly many of mine get published and I have discussions *cough* with many of the regulars. I have been having great pleasure pointing out to them that my predictions from the start of Turnbull’s usurping of the PMship were very accurate and he wasn’t the great many of them thought he would be!

          00

  • #
    pat

    must-reads.

    all the gossip from Bangkok:

    5 Sept: ClimateChangeNews: Bangkok bulletin: No one’s talking about ambition
    By Megan Darby and Natalie Sauer
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/09/05/bangkok-bulletin-no-ones-talking-ambition/

    5 Sept: ClimateChangeNews: Carbon trading rules meet socialist sticking point
    By Megan Darby
    Carbon trading is one of the most mature sections of the rulebook for the Paris climate agreement under negotiation in Bangkok this week…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/09/05/carbon-trading-rules-meet-socialist-sticking-point/

    5 Sept: ClimateChangeNews: Governments standing in way of $26 trillion green bonus, global commission finds
    By Natalie Sauer
    Penned by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, a body made up of former heads of governments and business and financial experts, the report urges governments to act in the next two to three years across the five economic sectors of energy, cities, food and land use, water and industry…

    Such moves could create over 65 million new low-carbon jobs in 2030, equivalent to today’s entire workforces of the UK and Egypt combined. Seven hundred thousand premature deaths from air pollution could be avoided in 2030…ETC
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/09/05/governments-standing-way-26-trillion-green-bonus-global-commission-finds/

    70

  • #
    NB

    Magic dust is sprinkled over most studies these days. What is wrong with these old-fashioned engineers?

    80

  • #
    pat

    DM will uncritically publish anything CAGW these days, it seems:

    5 Sept: Daily Mail: Why flat Earthers and Holocaust-deniers won’t change their mind: Researchers say some people’s brains are wired to value feedback over facts
    •Study suggests false beliefs are bolstered by feedback in response to opinions
    •Researchers found that positive and negative reactions were valued over facts
    •They say this could help explain why false beliefs propagate across social media
    By Cheyenne Macdonald
    In the study, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley recruited more than 500 adults for an online task on Amason’s Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6132321/Researchers-say-peoples-brains-wired-value-feedback-facts.html

    4 Sept: Science Daily: Why we stick to false beliefs: Feedback trumps hard evidence
    New study finds that feedback rather than hard evidence makes us more confident that we’re right
    Source: University of California – Berkeley
    Their findings, published today in the online issue of the journal Open Mind, shed new light on how people handle information that challenges their worldview, and how certain learning habits can limit one’s intellectual horizons.

    “If you think you know a lot about something, even though you don’t, you’re less likely to be curious enough to explore the topic further, and will fail to learn how little you know,” said study lead author Louis Marti, a Ph.D. student in psychology at UC Berkeley…
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180904150353.htm

    30

    • #
      yarpos

      I think that research is totally accurate and goes a long way to explaining why warmists/alarmists behave the way they do.

      40

  • #
    pat

    comment in moderation re: Daily Mail: Why flat Earthers and Holocaust-deniers won’t change their mind

    4 Sept: Bloomberg: Global Electricity Demand to Increase 57% by 2050
    ◾China and India will be the centers of growth
    ◾Electric Vehicles to account for 9% of demand by 2050
    Global electricity demand will reach around 38,700 terawatt-hours by 2050 from 25,000 terawatt-hours in 2017, driving new investment in power generating capacity, according to our New Energy Outlook 2018 (LINK)…
    https://about.bnef.com/blog/global-electricity-demand-increase-57-2050/

    30

  • #

    All right, but apart from mechanisation, electrification, construction, sanitation, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and all the rest of the infrastructure…what have the engineers ever done for us?

    140

  • #
    Curious George

    I have my doubts regarding numbers for “100% renewables with storage”. Battery storage? Hydro storage? Where did the numbers come from?

    110

    • #
      ivan

      That is the whole point – they can’t say because it is up to the individuals with rooftop solar to provide their own storage if they want electricity when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing, or blowing too hard.

      The idea is to get the surfs used to being up when the sun rises and going to bed when it goes down. The dystopian future for our children is being built now and the plebs do nothing about it.

      101

    • #
      TedM

      George I also have doubts about htdro storage. Pumped hydro = take already expensive energy and increase it’s cost by another 20%. Makes perfect sense to the Greens, and our previous Prime Minister.

      110

    • #
      yarpos

      Basically it made up rainbows and unicorns stuff. They talk about stuff as though it exists when it doesnt, they lie so long and so completly that they believe it themselves. There is no widely deployable storage system. Not saying their arent sweet spots where it can work, but its not a global solution now or in a useful timescale.

      40

    • #
      Another Ian

      Curious George

      Explained by #4.1.1

      10

  • #
    Ruairi

    The warmists and Greens are hellbent,
    In charging every last cent,
    From sun and windmills,
    On electrical bills,
    With renewable mindless intent.

    120

  • #
    • #
      glen Michel

      That is interesting.I will send it off to some Green “friends”. Get them out of the Pilliga and Bowen.

      10

  • #
    TedM

    “Green Genius” Oxymoron of the millenium, with emphasis on the moron.

    50

  • #
    TedM

    And after all what is $1,400 to a Green senator on $200,000 per annum (plus perks, makes me perk). And people actually vote these creeps.

    Never forget “Stupid is as stupid does”.

    120

  • #
    Peter C

    The article was published in the Australian yesterday. I was able to read the full text here;
    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/engineers-warn-ofbill-shock-under-green-energy-surge/news-story/89ef58cbc07a13726bbf9a014540ce17

    I am not sure if others will be able to read it. Usually the content in the Australian has a pay wall. Adam Creighton, the journalist does not give the title, nor a reference to the actual study. It was apparently sent to some politicians.

    Pat may have found the actual study at #5.

    60

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      PeterC:

      It is buried in today’s electronic edition under National Affairs/Mining and Energy. This is where they occasionally bury Graham Walsh if they anticipate too many trolls. It hasn’t worked in this case with over 700 comments, and about 20% of those by Peter & Stan, the “renewables are so cheap” troll twins.
      I’ve noticed at least 2 other Peters contributing good sense, are you one of them? There are also Graeme #4, myself (un-numbered) and at least one other, probably 2, Graemes.
      I have chipped Peter on several occasions about making up his figures but without effect. I have given up on checking his claims of fabulously low prices from renewables after I found that the 2 Chilean solar plants undercutting the world hadn’t actually started construction. But One item might be of interest; I commented that 28,000+ wind turbines plus hectares of subsidised solar hadn’t helped Germany reduce its (overall) emissions in 10 years. He fired back claiming that there had been a 15% reduction in emissions from electricity generation. Since he states elsewhere that Germany has reached 40% renewables it does raise the question “Would Shorten’s 45% target ONLY reduce our overall emissions by 15%?”
      I know that the said Peter believes anything in Reneweconomy but wonder where he gets the time to surf the net, and to comment at length in The Australia. Obviously young and naive, but can afford The Australian subscription and has close to full time use of a computer, so not at High School or unemployed. I assume a public servant or academic neglecting his duties. Does anybody know anything? Stan, the other renewables enthusiast troll, claims to be a semi-retired engineer with 40 years experience in generation. I doubt both the Engineer and the 40 years, but can understand the reluctance to employ him.

      100

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Engineers warn 55% renewables will add $1400 to electricity bills in Australia

    But it’s what the politicians “know” that counts, not what the engineers know. And the politicians just “know” for sure that they can sell one more snowjob to the unsuspecting public. And if not that, and a whole lot better anyway, the politicians have the power to simply say it’s so and it’s magically so.

    And them comes the fall. Volunteer knitters in the UK isn’t a good sign.

    Pull th plug on your Government. I’ve made some friends in Oz, including Jo and I’d hate to lose them.

    90

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Roy, I calculated that California would need approx 2% of its total land area covered in solar cells to run 100% on solar. What happens at night is anyone’s guess…bad stuff happens in the dark ….

      30

  • #
  • #
    Kinky Keith

    Those orange columns in the top diagram seem to be unrealistic.

    Suspect that they continue to include the current RET and Cross Subsidies which distort the cost reality.

    KK

    40

    • #
      Peter C

      Those orange columns in the top diagram seem to be unrealistic

      I agree Keith,

      All of the alternatives seem to be understated in terms of cost, except the current mix, which is already loaded with costly renewables.

      50

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        PeterC:

        I interpret the current mix cost as you suggest at $211 per MWh. There is no reason why nuclear or closed cycle gas couldn’t supply at that. The 100% renewables shows up the full costs as there is no other generation left to bear the costs of backup.

        30

        • #
          Peter C

          Figures presented to a meeting of the Engineers in Melbourne last year by Dr Tony Irwin and two others suggested that Nuclear would be at least twice the cost of Coal power stations.

          Also the cost of 100% renewables with storage is given as only 2 1/2 times the current cost, which I think is unlikely.

          40

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            It depends…I think if you can build large nuclear plants, presumably there would be economies of scale….

            30

            • #
              Peter C

              It may turn out to be the other way around Steve.

              Small Nuclear reactors (SMRs) have the advantage of factory assembly line construction. They can then be transported to the site and installed. The construction costs could be greatly reduced.

              Also the regulatory assessment process, which is very costly, would be done for the first one and then copied for the rest.

              As a bonus, more power plants improves the redundancy if there is a plant failure or maintenance.

              The South Koreans have shown that sequential construction saves a lot on construction costs, because supply chain issues are minimised. They don’t have our anti nuclear greens to overcome first.

              I listened to Dr Ben Heard at a recent Liberty Conference in Sydney. He discusses some of the issues.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhQCi0hnamc

              30

              • #
                Kinky Keith

                I think that Mark Ho, one of the article writers named above, was also a speaker at the conference.

                KK

                20

  • #
    PeterS

    Morrison will have to hammer this so hard during the election campaign it alone would enough to block ALP+Greens forming government in a canter (as he would say himself). After all only a fool with the logic and intelligence of a rock would now vote for ALP+Greens who believe in CAGW based on fake science and fake economics compared to real engineers using real science and real economics to argue to case of how an increase in our reliance renewables will be so destructive to our economy. Their credibility and the results speak for themselves. Time to put the screws on the ALP+Greens so hard they will end up being the party facing the risk of political oblivion not the LNP as it was heading under Turnbull.

    80

    • #
      RicDre

      I am worried about Australia’s new government:

      Australia and New Zealand and the Pacific Island Nations have just tried to bully the USA on climate policy by signing the Boe Declaration, a joint declaration of the 49th Pacific Islands Forum which names climate change as the single greatest threat to the region, and specifically demands that the USA rejoin the Paris Agreement.

      Pacific Forum: Climate Change the “Single Greatest Threat”, USA Should Pay Up

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/05/pacific-forum-climate-change-the-single-greatest-threat-usa-should-pay-up/

      70

      • #
        PeterS

        To be honest I am worried about any government long term, here or overseas, with the possible exception of Trump’s, which is only temporary anyway as he can’t be President forever. In the short term we evaded one catastrophe with Turnbull gone but we might have to face another one if Shorten wins. Morrison better start soon placing the microscope on SHorten and the ALP to expose how destructive and evil they are. Note how more and more people are blaming their failures on climate change, with the latest being the New York Times saying Roger Federer lost not because of John Millman being better but because of climate change. I suppose next we will hear Julie Bishops blaming climate change for the alleged bullying in the Liberal Party and the defeat of Turnbull. Funny that – I thought she did well all these years. It goes to show the elite left and their supporters are poor losers.

        70

      • #
        yarpos

        At least they are blatantly and honestly following the money for all to see.

        Its probably too late for the Maldives

        https://climatechangedispatch.com/four-weeks-left-until-the-maldives-drown/amp/

        30

        • #
          PeterS

          I’m pretty sure China looks at us as just another island with our size as a bonus to them.

          30

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            I should think so…beef, crops, uranium…if they wanted to walk in and take it we couldnt stop them.

            The yanks would protect their spy…er…listening bases and thats all….the population surviving would be a bonus…

            20

        • #
          Peter C

          four weeks left until the Maldives drown

          They are still selling holiday packages well into next year, on resorts just a metre above the water (on stilts)!
          :-)

          30

      • #
        Latus Dextro

        Virtue signalling is particularly strong in the eco-Marxist globalist enclave of New Zealand, indeed almost as strong as the absence of, and fear of, free-speech.
        Fortunately, the NZ and its Pacific island friends are as irrelevant in the geopolitical arena as a slight rash on a gnats bottom. It will be for the local electorates to decide whether they can face the ensuing privation as their Leftist globalist mistresses try to make their overburdened social welfare system work in the absence of prosperity and presence of energy impoverishment.
        Their kollectivist days, like most of the eco-Marxist globalists are numbered.

        30

  • #
    Mark M

    In other engineering news …

    Toyota is recalling 1 million hybrids at risk of catching fire

    https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/05/news/companies/toyota-prius-recall/index.html

    21st century questions …

    Where Are All the Hydrogen Cars?

    https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a22688627/hydrogen-fuel-cell-cars/

    70

  • #

    [...] case. I have not seen the study and as of last night Jo Nova had not seen it either, still this is her report based on The Australian story [...]

    50

    • #
      Peter C

      Thank You Catallaxy,

      The three objectives of the NEG are untouched:

      Reliable power.
      Cheaper power.
      More renewable energy in the grid.

      ……these objectives are incompatible.

      40

  • #
    pat

    ***this is what the govt is up against:

    6 Sept: ABC: Printed solar panels: Overhyped pipedream or renewable game changer?
    Analysis: ABC Science By environment reporter Nick Kilvert
    Updated 5 minutes ago
    First posted about 5 hours ago
    A research team from the University of Newcastle made headlines last week when they installed a 200-square-metre array of working solar panels on a factory roof in Newcastle.
    Which isn’t very impressive in its own right … except that the solar cells were printed on a reel-to-reel printer.
    Advocates of the new technology say it can revolutionise the way solar panels are made and distributed in Australia and around the world.
    But hype aside, printed panels are less efficient than silicon-based panels, they only last a couple of years, and making them isn’t as simple as hitting print on your home computer…

    ***While some in Canberra have been arguing that renewables have been driving up power prices, a Renewable Energy Index report (LINK) from July has shown the exact opposite.
    Power prices have risen in response to the shutdown of power stations like Hazelwood and Northern Power Station, but have been driven down by renewables.
    Wholesale power prices are forecast to halve over the next four years due to the addition of extra large-scale renewables since October 2016.
    And an Australian Energy Market Operator report has found that the most economical way to replace our ageing coal plants is with renewables (LINK).
    “The lowest cost replacement for this retiring capacity and energy will be a portfolio of resources, including solar (28 gigawatts), wind (10.5 GW) and storage (17 GW and 90 GWh), complemented by 500 megawatts of flexible gas plant and transmission investment,” the report said…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-09-06/printed-solar-panels-renewable-energy/10186950

    30

    • #
      Dennis

      Next federal election 2019, about one year to go. The next term of 3-years will end in 2022.

      Electricity prices will halve over the next four years AEMO government department claims?

      Voters have short memories and politicians depend on it.

      50

    • #
      pat

      it’s never-ending RE advocacy at theirABC, who believe Bloomberg & GS:

      3 Sept: ABC: The reality is new coal power is not the answer for cheaper electricity bills
      By Stephen Long
      The tipping point’s been reached: renewable energy is now a cheaper source of power for Australia’s future electricity needs than coal.
      Surprised? That’s understandable, given the plethora of politicians in Canberra who keep saying that coal is the key to cheap electricity and renewables drive up prices.
      Among them, the “insurgents” — demanding that new coal-fired power stations be built — who helped roll a prime minister viewed as not sufficiently pro-coal.

      But it’s a fact. The cold, hard numbers show that new renewable energy is supplying cheaper electricity than new coal-fired power plants could and will continue do so.
      No less an authority than the Australian Energy Market Operator agrees…
      New coal power didn’t rate a mention.
      And no wonder.
      Prices of electricity from new renewable energy projects are already far cheaper than the likely price from the new-generation coal plants some Coalition MPs want to see built…

      At market rates of financing, the lowest cost of electricity from a new coal generator using so-called “high-efficiency, low-emissions” technology would be more than $150 a megawatt hour, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
      In the absence of big government subsidies and underwriting, analysts say a new coal generator would need a price of more than $80 a megawatt hour for its electricity just to cover the costs of its operation.
      Meanwhile, the only way for renewable power prices appears to be down.
      The cost of solar power modules has fallen by up to 30 per cent this year alone, according to recent analysis by Bank of America/Merrill Lynch, with huge supply from China driving prices down.
      With new solar panels now available that you can simply print and stick on your roof, the likelihood is that prices will plummet in the future…

      The reality is new coal power is not the answer
      According to Goldman Sachs, wind and solar power prices will fall by between one-third and 43 per cent by 2025. Some analysts consider this estimate conservative…

      Have no doubt, some Coalition MPs will want Mr Taylor and the Government to back new coal-fired power plants to meet future energy needs, regardless of the numbers.
      But the economic reality is that, if lowering electricity prices is really the focus, new coal power is not the answer.
      Mr Taylor has been a vocal opponent of windfarms and a darling of the anti-wind farm lobby and of the anti-renewables right-wing of the Coalition…ETC
      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-03/angus-taylor-energy-minister-power-price-solution-curious/10188496

      40

      • #
        TedM

        The following is a ball faced lie. “But it’s a fact. The cold, hard numbers show that new renewable energy is supplying cheaper electricity than new coal-fired power plants could and will continue do so.”

        How do they justify it. They use the cost of power produced by coal fired stations that are used to prop up unreliable and expensive power from wind farms. The coal fired power stations are being forced to operate inefficiently and for some of the time to produce power that can not be purchased because legislation demands that power from wind farms be purchased first.

        Lets see wind power stand alone, no prop up by coal or gas, no subsidies and compare the power price with a stand alone coal fired power station.

        120

    • #
      Chad

      You do not need to be a power expert to see that 28GW of solar , and 10GW of wind will not replace the existing generation capacity..
      ……unless they really mean those numbers are “output” and not just the normal “nameplate” figures before CF allowance..IE 100GW solar, and 30GW of wind !! (Cost that lot out for a shock !)
      And 90GWh of storage wont see the country far into a windless night…about 4 hours infact !!
      ….at a cost of about $65 Bn in batteries. (Much much more if pumped hydro !)
      These guys are jokers and are taking us all as fools !

      80

      • #
        PeterS

        All true of course. Trouble is so many people believe otherwise and have a lot of trust in the ALP+Greens delivering the undeliverable, believing in the unbelievable and thinking in the unthinkable. In other words those who want Shorten to become PM are cookoo.

        40

  • #
  • #
    pat

    5 Sept: ABC: Australia signs declaration on Pacific climate ‘threat’, islands call on US to return to Paris deal
    By Pacific affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic, Michael Walsh and Jack Kilbride
    Updated 57 minutes ago
    Australia, New Zealand and Pacific nations have signed a declaration highlighting climate change as “the single greatest threat” to Pacific people, while island nations called on the United States to return to the Paris agreement…

    Australia would also not back a statement from small island states which calls for countries to “urgently accelerate” reductions in carbon emissions.
    Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga didn’t directly name Australia, but when pressed by journalists confirmed a country “starting with a capital A” had objected…

    ***Australia and New Zealand also didn’t join a call from other Pacific Island Forum members for the United States to re-join the Paris climate change agreement…

    China’s representative at PIF walked out of a meeting after being denied an opportunity to address leaders about climate change.
    (Nauru’s President Baron Waqa) lashed out at the official during the meeting’s final press conference, and said Nauru would try to escalate the dispute.
    “Would he behave like that in front of his own President? … You look at him, he’s a nobody!” Mr Waqa said.
    “We won’t just seek an apology, we’ll even take it to the UN.”
    Tensions first flared when Chinese officials were unable to enter Nauru on diplomatic passports.
    Nauru is one of the Pacific nations which recognises Taiwan rather than Beijing — and the episode highlighted the way their contest for influence can stir conflict in the region…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-05/australia-and-pacific-nations-sign-climate-security-declaration/10204422

    50

  • #
    David Maddison

    Since the unreliables are basically useless I suspect that the shortfall of electricity will be produced by hugely expensive diesel generators which are quietly being installed. Diesel costs something like 45 times more per unit of electricity compared to coal.

    (Cost calculation on US prices and a specific coal source.
    http://www.science-ebooks.com/ematrix7/cost_ratio_diesal_to_coal.htm )

    80

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes, yet another truth that Morrison can use in his election campaign to expose the left as nothing other than nation destroyers. Funny how things have changed for the better already for the LNP since fake Turnbull (aka traitor to the Liberal cause) has left the scene. Still there’s much more needed to be done by the LNP to win, and they can so easily if they try hard enough. Time will tell if they do.

      50

  • #
    David Maddison

    This is Australia’s electricity future.

    https://youtu.be/EkNTAiWX8g0

    30

  • #
    David Maddison

    One crucial factor in the calculations is that windmills are now known to have a much shorter service life than earlier optimistic calculations and a much higher disposal cost at end of life.

    80

  • #
    David Maddison

    For every windmill or solar panel you see there is an equivalent properly engineered and inexpensive power source backing it up such as coal, gas, hydro or in proper countries, nuclear. Unfortunately in Australia we are not building the first two or the last one and there is very little real hydro potential left (and Greens would stop any dams) leaving only diesel generators, normally only designed for emergencies, remote mining sites or third world countries to make up the increasingly large generation shortfall.

    40

    • #
      Dennis

      I have no doubt that Australia’s decreasing diesel reserve stock is because of increased use of diesel generators, particularly in South Australia, and the demand will increase for diesel.

      Former ADF Major General and now Liberal Senator has expressed his concern to the government several times recently.

      Less than 30-days supply was the last I read.

      90

  • #
    David Maddison

    More unreliables means more reliables have to be installed for backing them up for the vast majority of time they produce nothing. The only reliable backup being permitted is diesel so essentially Australia will become a (former?) first world country that uses diesel for electricity production rather than a cheap power source such as coal.

    60

    • #
      PeterS

      Good point. In other words, while the rest of the world is powering ahead with coal fired power more and more we have politicians, MSM and others hell bent on taking us back to the stone age. The KNP can beat the ALP+Greens in a canter with this and many other facts about renewables.

      40

  • #
    David Maddison

    O/T

    Australia will be expected to contribute to a new $US1.5 billion Pacific Resilience Facility to help island nations adapt to the impacts of rising sea levels and more frequent natural disasters, after acknowledging climate change as the region’s biggest security threat.

    The final communique agreed by Pacific Islands Forum nations in Nauru last night called on all countries to implement their promised Paris agreement carbon emissions cuts.

    The communique, endorsed by Australia and the 17 other PIF nations, included an agreement to establish the new resilience fund, to be financed by member countries and multilateral organisations.

    See link for rest.

    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/pacific-islands-forum-communique-says-climate-change-biggest-threat-to-region/news-story/81c671c65129ade1be4afdc496b5a0c8

    30

    • #
      yarpos

      Watch $1.5billion evaporate with little of consequence to show for it in the way of faux sea level rise. Meanwhile the Seychelles builds a new airport at the same elevation (close to sea level) as the old one, shhhhhhh.

      120

    • #
      Dennis

      Australia will contribute 35 per cent of the $1.5 billion.

      The Australian Government is phoning China as I type to sell them more Bonds to pay, so add interest expense for decades to come.

      60

      • #
        Kinky Keith

        That’s absolute B$LLSH$T.

        That’s another half a million: for absolutely nothing.

        KK

        20

        • #
          Kinky Keith

          In the not too distant future, I hope, We will be able to buy the new children’s Fairytale:

          The Grim Fairytale of the

          United Nations’Invisible Climate Cloak.

          Subtitled, Look, The Ocean is going Down and it’s Freezing this Summer.

          KK

          30

        • #
          Kinky Keith

          Billion

          10

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Let it all collapse I say….the sooner the renewables stupidity hits the wall at high speed, the sooner we can get on with life.

      40

      • #

        Beware clean-slate ideology, once smashed, on what do you build
        to try ‘n get it back together again? Observe Nature’s trial and
        error way, adapt, reform. Revolution means collapse and hole new
        ball game and extremism. Heaps worse than broken glass sindrome.

        60

  • #
    Speedy

    …And wreck the economy.

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    60

  • #
    Serp

    If our power bills included the amount hived off for Large Generation Certificate disbursements rather than some fantasy carbon dioxide emissions estimate I daresay the RET would disappear within one parliamentary session.

    10

  • #
    mareeS

    We haven’t actually been living in energy poverty this winter, but we did conduct some useful experiments in old-fashioned energy conservation that our parents used in the brownout/blackout days of 1960s.

    Our house is 100yo, and now that the kids have flown the coop we have kept all bedroom doors closed, only turn on the gas heating in the evening, unnecessary lights off, use cosy throw rugs in the evening hours and woolly winter clothes.

    Result for winter: gas bill for cooking/heating/hot water $148 plus change, electricity $220 plus change. We haven’t felt any great hardship. This in a household of two with all the usual modcons apart from aircon, pool etc. obviously it would increase a bit if the kids ever moved back.

    40

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      That’s highly commendable and I would suspect that many adopt similar lifestyle.

      Trouble is, like water rationing, Government will adopt that as official policy and when power generation gets to the critical low point and the lights go out, guess who gets the blame.

      No Dams, no reliable electricity plants, jobs gone overseas.

      We are close to becoming the third world country that our parents didn’t want us to be.

      We urgently need HELE.

      KK

      20

  • #
    pat

    never do these ABC pieces get opinions from a different perspective, but they always attack those different perspectives anyway!

    27 Aug: ABC: How Andy Vesey became the fall guy in the national power play
    By business editor Ian Verrender
    For more than two years, Mr Vesey has been on the receiving end of an increasingly hostile attack from the Federal Government, coal lobbyists and various sections of the media.
    Variously described as a “Yankee” along with breathless accusations that he arrived in Australia on a 457 visa — both of which are self-evidently true — it seems Mr Vesey last week decided enough was enough. The timing couldn’t have been more pointed.
    His crime? He was doing the job the AGL board employed him to do when he was hired in 2015; to take the company into the future, a future that involved gradually scaling back its carbon emissions…
    Who’s really to blame for expensive electricity?
    There are three main causes for the extraordinary spike in electricity prices across most of the country.
    The first, and the major cause, is 15 years of federal government inaction and factional infighting over energy policy which stalled private investment in new generation resulting in a supply shortage.
    The second is the enormous spike in gas prices…
    And the third was the gold plating of the poles and wires networks…

    Households years ago opted to leave Canberra behind with a rush to rooftop solar, a trend that was accelerated by the huge lifts in electricity prices.
    Now big business is doing the same…

    Here’s what some of them had to say this week on ABC’s The Business.
    BHP chief executive Andrew McKenzie:
    “I’m disappointed here [Australia] and I was disappointed when Donald Trump abandoned Paris. I personally asked him not to.
    “We in BHP are very clear. We think climate change is happening and the way to deal with that is to create less carbon in energy and less CO2 emissions from industrial processes.”

    BlueScope Steel’s John Nolan:
    “The goal of the project [a multi-year energy purchase agreement from Australia's biggest ever solar farm] is to reduce the cost of our power but, as well as that, the goal of the project is to try and do something to reduce the emissions from the power that we do use.”…

    UK industrial and steel magnate Sanjeev Gupta, owner of the Whyalla steelworks on his $1 billion solar and storage investment for Whyalla:
    “That will give us the ability to offer dispatchable baseload power at prices cheaper than other forms of power.”
    Confectionary group Mars has a new solar offtake agreement. Numerous other companies are heading down a similar path…

    Just like Hazelwood, Liddell will be shut because it is no longer viable. Mr Vesey, like Frank Calabria at Origin and Catherine Tanna at Energy Australia, was hired to transition AGL from coal to renewables.
    Why? The economics favour it.
    The cost of renewables has plummeted, the technology is advancing at breakneck speed and it is cleaner…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-27/how-andy-vesey-became-the-fall-guy-in-the-national-power-play/10166882

    21

    • #
      Peter C

      Just like Hazelwood, Liddell will be shut because it is no longer viable. Mr Vesey, like Frank Calabria at Origin and Catherine Tanna at Energy Australia, was hired to transition AGL from coal to renewables.
      Why? The economics favour it.
      The cost of renewables has plummeted, the technology is advancing at breakneck speed and it is cleaner…

      All TRUE!

      Except for the plummeting cost, the rapid advance of the technology, the cleanness, and the SUBSIDIES.

      40

  • #
    pat

    can’t find anything but theirABC carrying this, nor anything anywhere online about this “Steven Churches” getting involved, so it looks like a last minute link up!

    6 Sept: ABC: Leigh Creek Aboriginal group seeks to stop coal gas extraction after minister’s approval
    By Rebecca Puddy
    Posted 9 minutes ago
    An Aboriginal group has launched an 11th-hour bid to stop underground gas extraction at Leigh Creek in South Australia’s far north.
    The Adnyamathanha people today applied for an injunction in South Australia’s Supreme Court to halt plans to trial underground coal gasification at Leigh Creek’s former coalfields…

    While the site was home to a coal mine that supplied the Alinta power station in Whyalla up until its closure in late 2015, Mr Coulthard said it now needed to be given the opportunity to “heal”.
    “It’s been damaged over the years, certainly, what needs to happen is a healing process needs to be put in place to give yulu (yulu muda, the Kingfisher Man, one of the major creation ancestors of the Adnyamathanha people) another life,” he said.
    “Yulu is important to my people and we need to do whatever it takes to protect it.”…

    The group’s lawyer Steven Churches told the court Leigh Creek Energy’s environmental statement on the project was “deficient” and did not comply with the law.
    He asked that the challenge be heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-06/leigh-creek-aboriginal-group-bid-to-stop-gas-extraction/10208780

    00

  • #
    pat

    comment in moderation re: 6 Sept: ABC: Leigh Creek Aboriginal group seeks to stop coal gas extraction after minister’s approval

    btw the only other recent media piece quoting Steven Churches is this nasty warning to Barnaby Joyce from Richard Ackland.
    (note: As of July 2014, Ackland is employed as the Legal Editor at Large at Guardian Australia – Wikipedia)

    16 Aug 2017: Guardian: Barnaby Joyce beware. Judges don’t like it when politicians tell them what to do
    The deputy prime minister’s future is at the mercy of the high court’s interpretation of a vaguely-written clause of the constitution. There could be some legal fireworks.
    by Richard Ackland
    In any event, there have been plenty of delightful scrapes, with the current constitutional cherry that takes the cake being Barnaby (Kiwi) Joyce. He was so strident in his determination to be the bowyanged Aussie bushwhacker that we should have twigged to him earlier…

    Adelaide barrister Dr Steven Churches points out that at the time our constitution was under contemplation the British parliament didn’t seem overly fussed with rights and privileges derived from a foreign power…
    According to Dr Churches there were greater concerns about parliamentary eligibility – such the the “Godliness” of members of the House of Commons…ETC
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/16/section-44-of-the-constitution-is-a-curious-beast-one-thats-been-ignored-over-the-years

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Stop trying to idiotically reduce (an impossibility) CO2: it will cost $0 per ton.

    40

  • #
    dennisambler

    “The Abbott “Direct Action” auctions cost taxpayers about $12-14 per ton of CO2 reduction”

    Do these spreadsheet calculations actually mean anything and did the climate notice anyway?

    30

  • #
    sharper

    The electricity rate in Texas is more likely a ‘third of’ the rate in Victoria and NSW or else ‘two-thirds lower’ than the rate in Victoria and NSW, rather than a “third lower”. This site shows Texans can pay as little as US5.3c per kWh. https://electricityrates.com/texas/

    00

    • #
      Chad

      But that 5.3c /kWh is only the cost of power….not the final cost the consumer pays.
      It does not include the Utility Transmission and Distribution charges, or any of the other standing costs,….which all end up with a typical average retail cost in Texas of about 11-12c/kWh.
      Those costs vary considerably depending on which Utility is providing the service.
      (Which happens to be about double what it was before Texas started installing significant amounts of RE (wind) around the year 2000 !)
      https://tcaptx.com/reports/snapshot-report-electricity-prices-texas-july-2017

      10

  • #

    [...] of a threadster on Jo Nova’s post on the >Electric Power Consulting report titled National Electricity Market (NEM) Model, this [...]

    00