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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Australia’s $25b renewables bubble set to bust: ABC starts promo to prop it up

Is this the peak of Australia’s renewables bubble?

A Crash Test Dummy Update: Last year our renewables capacity grew 50%. We have more renewables per capita than any other country on Earth. Investors spent $25 billion in just one year, and that doesn’t include the cost of the rampant uptake of home solar PV or presumably, all the subsidies. Our 56 gigawatt grid now includes six gigawatts of unreliables. But Lordy, lo, look what’s coming in the next three years in the table after this graph … potentially another 30GW. How many billion will we burn on this pyre?

In the graph below, note how dependent investors are on government rules and largess. Kevin Rudd started at the end of 2007. Abbott won in mid 2013. Turnbull took over in mid 2016. Investors came and went, not with demand, but with politics.

The headline: “Renewable energy investment looks to be going from boom to bust as prices collapse”

by Stephen Letts, ABC News

Renewables bubble, Australia, 2019, solar, wind, generation, graph.

Figure 1: RHS Renewables investment (the dotted line). LHS Energy generation by Wind and Solar (columns).

 

Uh-oh. Look at what’s coming:

How big is the oversupply that’s on the way? Check out the ominous table hidden at the bottom of the ABC story.

Extra committed and contracted renewables by 2020-21 across NEM (MWh)

2018 2020/21 2021 vs 2018
Hydro 16,704 15,000 -1,704
Rooftop solar 8,148 13,419 5,271
Solar farm 2,122 14,486 12,364
Wind farm 14,164 28,869 14,705
Net total extra supply 30,636

Source: Green Energy Markets

But the bust is on the horizon the ABC warns:

Apparently investors have noticed a problem coming.

  • Long-term power purchasing agreements for large scale renewable generators have fallen 30pc in the past 5 years
  • AEMO has slashed the prices paid to many more remote renewable generators
  • A wave of new projects, equivalent to two Hazelwood plants, will start in the next two years leading to a large oversupply imbalance

Would you like propaganda with that?

Now with the first hints that our latest wild bubble might bust, the ABC is not warning us about rushing in too fast, too soon, instead they’re running a soft ad campaign to prop up this pointless industry longer. Author Stephen Letts interviews only Green industry hacks and phrases it all as a “problem” to be solved. It’s almost like he works for the industry?

Having burst out of an investment black hole at warp speed, the renewable energy sector’s massive building boom looks likely to hit an uncompromising wall.

The reckoning is likely to be sooner rather later, as a nasty confluence of factors keeps mounting up.

To ABC staff, this is a “a nasty confluence of factors”. To skeptics it’s a dose of reality.

The AEMO may have cruelly “slashed prices” but it’s just as true to say they’ve been overpaying remote generators for electricity that was being lost in long transmission lines.

As for new projects being “equivalent to two Hazelwoods” — hello DisneyWatts! 4,000MW of random, asynchronous, unreliable generation is not remotely equivalent to 16 centralized turbines honed through decades of engineering efficiency to run at 90% capacity non stop for 50 years. On any given day the unreliables may only be producing 100MW, not 4,000.  We need a 98% back up. What do you call the spare car you can only rely on to drive at 2% of the speed limit? Useless.

Holy Cash Cow, this is so unfair!

Coal is still cheap

This might be the only time the ABC have admitted how cheap coal power is — in the middle of a story about why renewables need more help.

Clearly a problem for utility-scale renewable growth at these prices is that old, debt-free coal-fired plants operate profitably at $40/MWh.

What a problem eh? Cheap, debt free, competition that works when we need it!

They [coal plants] also keep churning away when the wind stops blowing and the sun stops shining, a trait retailers are prepared to pay for.

 As they say in the industry — “thermal plants burn fossil fuels, renewables burn cash” …

(Poor baby renewables!)

The answer naturally is to shut coal down. So the ABC interviews a Green Industry spokesperson who offers the obvious solution:

“We can have lower power prices, but for them to be sustained we need a policy framework in place that allows us to steadily build replacement capacity in advance of coal plants retiring.”

– Green Energy’s Tristan Edis

Translated: my industry wants guaranteed money from the government and rules that get rid of competition.

Yes, don’t we all?

Notice he dangles the classic sales line “We can have lower power prices”. Sure. We could legislate to make electricity 10c per kilowatt hour. But the money’s got to come from somewhere or the lights go off. Is that through tax? Connection fees? Energy Levy payments to Tesla?

If the ABC served the other half of the nation they’d interview an electrical engineer or two, or maybe a dumb blogger who’d tell them the answer was to let the free market work and get the government out of the way.

The article also somberly discussed fantasy figures like costs of $55 per MW hour. As readers here know, they are not worth analyzing because they are wholly cherry picked delusions based on bids from generators that don’t have to pay for their wildly long transmission lines, their back up, their unreliable product, or the inefficiency burden they dump on the whole system, or the houses they burn down. And in Australia, they get the RET subsidy, and often low cost loans, as well as access to a 1 billion dollar free advertising agency called the ABC too.

The only numbers that count — the number of states with lots of solar and wind and cheap electricity. That’s Zero.

h/t Peter Fitzroy and Dave B.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (92 votes cast)
Australia's $25b renewables bubble set to bust: ABC starts promo to prop it up, 9.6 out of 10 based on 92 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/y24x9gpp

187 comments to Australia’s $25b renewables bubble set to bust: ABC starts promo to prop it up

  • #
    tom0mason

    As the era of a cooling planet marches ever onward, the Australian political machine goes to full stupid, and launches yet more propaganda campaigns to keep the scam of ‘free’ ruin-nation electricity going.

    Only the completely Green-addled could believe ‘Invest more get less product’ mantra. Can more wind and solar generators ever be effective strategy of supply when customers demand reliable (24/7/365) electricity supply at affordable costs? No of course it can not. Only an idiot would believe so.

    231

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Can more wind and solar generators ever be effective strategy of supply when customers demand reliable (24/7/365) electricity supply at affordable costs?

      To quote a famous president, “It depends on what the meaning of the word reliable is.”

      The definition is everything. And maybe, just maybe it means the lights will be on a week from today for 4 hours. Like the idiotic thinkers at the UN who rank equal access to medical care higher than the quality of that care, so too it is possible to say, if you’re connected to the grid the criteria are all met, you have access to electricity. So what if you have to wait a week for the lights to work again? It matters no more than the weeks or months to get seen by a doctor in some places as long as everyone has equal access to the long wait times.

      In other words, when you want what you want, what does honesty matter?

      90

  • #
    Roger

    We have fantasy bids for “low cost” wind here in the UK.

    Great propaganda for eco-activists but the problem is they are too low in price to generate a profit and almost certainly aren’t going to be built .

    140

  • #
    StephenP

    If the renewables are so cheap, then why doesn’t the government cap wholesale electricity prices at the level they say they can produce at?

    400

    • #
      Steve Richards

      Your not meant to notice things like that!!

      230

    • #

      All that needs to be done is to get rid of all subsidies, for the generators a well as home solar owners. If renewables are so cheap and competitive, there is no need for subsidies. Who could genuinely argue against this? This could be so easily pushed by a government wanting to win an election and an opposition to refute the proposal would sound like a hypocrite or shill for big corporations? The emperor having no clothes would be quickly revealed to all.

      421

      • #
        BoyfromTottenham

        Bemused, maybe help is on its way – there is good news from here: (see Spot Prices graph and further down Latest Forward Trades
        http://www.demandmanager.com.au/certificate-prices/

        In short, the spot price of Large Renewable Energy certificates (LGCs) have fallen from A$85 / MWH to A$35 / MWH since last April, and worse (for renewables investors), the forward price bid is down to only A$15 for Feb 2022 contracts. Whoops – there goes most of that subsidy!

        180

        • #

          Electricity Bill will fix that if he gets in, Industry Super will make sure of that.

          90

        • #
          yarpos

          Oh dear I hope the LGCs dont impact the Hepburn Springs windfarm to much.

          I was just reading their annual report , its quite telling what they choose to report on and what they ignore.

          In performance they talk about availability, rather than capacity factor. Apparently its fantastic that the system is available even if syanding still. In financials they spend a lot of time discussing and graphing LGC prices rather than talking about income from actual generation. Its pretty clear what the real goals of the project are.

          100

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      Steve that is what AEMO is doing, in effect. The problem is that a coal plant has a design life of around 50 years, whereas renewables are around 15-20 (for wind). Now that AEMO has leveled up the market, it takes renewables much longer to reach break even. In turn, this means that investment dollars will divert to a more profitable industry.

      162

      • #
        Peter C

        h/t Peter Fitzroy and Dave B.

        Apparently something you wrote inspired Jo to write this post.

        Well done.

        140

        • #
          David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

          G’day Peter C,
          I can’t speak for PF, but my contribution was to have tripped over the ABC article in “Just In” and sending that link to Jo before I’d finished reading it. It sounded that significant to me, partly because the ABC seemed to be expressing some sort of realism, even though it was incomplete.
          Jo has made much better use of it than I could.
          Cheers,
          Dave B

          170

          • #
            Peter Fitzroy

            Dave – like most news publications, the business section tends to more level headed and the ABC is no exception

            61

            • #
              Bill in Oz

              So the business community is more aware of when they are having their tail pulled by the ABC?

              What does this say about more politically minded section of the ABC ?

              Lies and propaganda are just par for the course !

              141

      • #
        el gordo

        Congrats Mr Fitzroy on getting a mention.

        Do you think this comment by Letts/ABC is true or false?

        ‘…. a trait retailers are prepared to pay for.’

        60

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          yep – the consumer contracts for 24/7 365 – Acts of god, storms and maintenance are excepted. but you still ge 4 9′s.

          50

          • #
            Bobl

            Actually it’s 20 hours in a year or about 99.77% reliability, something solar and wind producers can only dream about.

            130

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Actually it’s 20 hours in a year or about 99.77% reliability, something solar and wind producers can only dream about.

              Ouch! You were not supposed to notice that. Why confuse the Peter Fitzroys of this world with facts when they are obvviously quite satisfied with their fantasy?

              Of course, they are prepared to ignore facts anyway. So it may not matter how much you confuse them.

              61

          • #
            AndyG55

            Thing is, if one coal turbine goes down, the rest are still humming away.

            If the wind drops over large areaa, which it can in Australia, you get NOTHING. !

            182

            • #
              Bill in Oz

              Light winds today in SA as a high moves slowly Eastwards..

              So bugger all windy electrons

              In the power grid

              For the next day or so.

              And reduced solar power as the sun has moved Northwards

              Leading to lower effectiveness..

              Wonderful news.

              Situation which is perfectly normal !

              Better turn the coal & gas turbines up !

              120

            • #
              theRealUniverse

              New name for those wirrly things that are a blot on the landscape ‘windlessbines’.

              90

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          “a trait retailers are prepared to pay for”.

          I wasn’t aware that this “trait” is an optIonal item. I haven’t kept up with the details, but I thought “renewables” were guaranteed by government decree a place in the market at their convenience, while this ‘trait”, i.e. fossil fired, picks up the balance at greatly inflated cost.

          00

      • #
        AndyG55

        Remove the RET and subsidies, there would be a very negative profit in wind or solar.

        221

        • #
          el gordo

          The RET has only a year to run.

          “The renewable energy target is going to wind down from 2020, it reaches its peak in 2020, and we won’t be replacing that with anything.” Angus Taylor

          80

      • #
        AndyG55

        “The problem is that a coal plant has a design life of around 50 years”

        umm, Peter, that really isn’t a “problem”, more of a “feature”, wouldn’t you agree! ;-)

        (look , first name, and I gave you an upthumb)

        Now just tell us the ACP policies I wrote yesterday are the way to go,

        and that you will be voting ACP in the Senate. :-)

        141

        • #
          AndyG55

          ” I wrote yesterday ”

          I posted yesterday…….

          Although those policies are very close to what I would “write”.

          71

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          yep – the problem for renewables is the design life, which is what I meant. As to the ACP – I do like their energy policy, but not the rest.

          80

          • #
            AndyG55

            I’ve gone over their policies, and I cannot see any that a sane, rational person would argue against.

            102

          • #

            Design Life is the main thing here.

            All costs must be recovered from the sale of the electricity units across the life of the plant, eg Dollars per MWH, so the more MWH you can generate, and the longer you can do that at, then the cost per unit of electricity is cheaper.

            Examples.

            Bayswater coal fired power plant. Nameplate – 2640MW. Life Span – 50 years. Lifetime Capacity Factor – 78%. Total generated lifetime power – 900TWH (900,000,000MWH)

            Macarthur Wind Plant. Nameplate – 420MW. Life Span – 20 years. Lifetime Capacity Factor – 28%. Total Generated lifetime power – 20TWH (20,000,000MWH)

            See now how the costs for Bayswater can be ‘thinned out’, because it delivers so much more power.

            Macarthur has a lot less time, and generates a lot less power to recover all its costs than does Bayswater.

            The same will apply for a new USC coal fired power plant. (HELE) The up front cost is a lot more, but they have the extended time, and more power over the life of the plant to recover all costs.

            Keep in mind here that Macarthur cost (‘around’ they tell us) more than a Billion Dollars.

            Tony.

            (Capacity Factors (CF) are indicative, as both will have higher CF at the front end)

            270

  • #
    David Wojick

    In related news — My latest:
    Batteries cannot make renewables reliable
    https://www.cfact.org/2019/04/26/batteries-cannot-make-renewables-reliable/

    At today’s prices it would take $25.2 Billion dollars to make a $150 Million dollar wind farm reliable. Battery backup is therefore impossible.

    Excerpts: “Utilities are starting to experiment with adding batteries to wind and solar projects. These storage projects are feeding the mistaken belief that batteries can cure the intermittency that makes wind and solar unworkable as a reliable source of power. The reality is that these battery projects are trivial in size compared to what would actually be needed to make wind or solar reliable. The cost of battery based reliability would actually be stupendous, far more than we could ever afford. Here are some simple numbers to make the point.

    At utility scale we are talking about megawatts, not kilowatts, so the battery cost is $1.5 million per MWh. By coincidence, $1.5 million per MW is also roughly the cost of a wind farm. Much follows from this. A smallish wind farm might have generating capacity of 100 MW, so costing around $150 million. The cost of the batteries to make this farm a reliable power generator turns out to be much, much greater.

    Suppose we want to store enough juice to back up the wind farm for just one day, when the wind speed is too low to generate any power. Let’s say we simply need 100 MW for 24 hours, or 2,400 MWh. At $1.5 million per MWh that is a whopping $3,600 million or $3.6 billion. In short, the batteries cost 24 times more than the “backed up” wind farm costs.

    This huge cost certainly makes the wind farm unaffordable, but it gets much worse. Under standard conditions a wind farm produces no power around 25% of the time, due to low wind conditions. Low wind periods of up to a week are fairly common, created by stagnant huge high pressure systems. The power battery system has to be big enough to accommodate these long periods of no wind power.

    A week has 168 hours so we need 16,800 MWh of battery storage capacity, at the enormous cost of $25.2 billion, just to make a $150 million wind farm reliable. This would obviously be absurd, which makes the whole idea of battery backup absurd. Even if the cost of batteries were to come way down, say by 90%, the cost would still be wildly prohibitive.

    Batteries simply cannot make renewables reliable. They cost too much.”

    There is more in the article. It took a lot of research to tell this simple story. Many thanks to my sponsors.

    500

    • #

      Gives new life to the old caveat “Batteries not included”.

      370

    • #
      Robber

      Thanks David, useful information.
      Couple of comments:
      “A smallish wind farm might have generating capacity of 100 MW, so costing around $150 million.” (Nameplate or delivered power?)
      In Australia, Ararat wind farm in Victoria, completed in 2017, 75 towers, nameplate capacity 240 MW, average generation 72 MW, capital cost A$240 million.
      In South Australia, Hornsdale wind farm, 99 wind turbines with a nameplate capacity of 315 megawatts. The plant is owned and operated by Neoen, a French renewable energy company, cost: A$800 million. At 100MW/129MWh, the Hornsdale Power Reserve is the largest lithium-ion battery in the world, and provides network security services, reported cost from Telsa US$50 million.
      Construction has begun on what will be one of Australia’s biggest wind energy developments – the 530 MW nameplate Stockyard Hill Wind Farm in western Victoria, estimated capital cost A$700 million.

      130

    • #
      RickWill

      You are on the right track but you are not considering the minimum cost option.

      If the system was aiming for 100% intermittent generation then the minimum cost system will have overbuild in generating capacity Even ARENA now recognise this fundamental). In this scenario wind is next to useless because it does go missing for long periods. However on mainland Australia you can guarantee at 99.9% certainty 2 hours of equivalent full sunshine in 48 hours. So if you have a battery large enough to supply your load for two days and a 3 to 4-fold overbuild in solar collection capacity then you have a reliable on-demand source. The linked report is what I provided to the Finkel enquiry:
      http://www.environment.gov.au/submissions/nem-review/willoughby.pdf
      It has some charts based on actual 30-minute generating data from the Broken Hill solar plant in combination with storage. It scopes the system size for a 100% solar supplied NEM.

      Given that there will be existing coal plants, then enough storage to get through a few hours, like the Hornsdale battery, means coal fuelled generators can operate at steady output where they are most efficient. So a few hours of storage can actually have economic merit as Hornsdale has demonstrated.

      The fundamental error was allowing intermittents priority access to the electricity market. Intermittents in combination with storage can provide economic power in locations that do not have an existing grid connection. At current component prices, solar can produce energy at lower cost than burning diesel. In combination with a battery and small fossil fuel generator, costs are close to parity with current retail grid price.

      40

      • #
        Karabar

        I think your assessment can be borne out by real data from the KEREIP (King Island Renewable Energy Integration Project).
        It replaces the old Diesel gen sets which cost a small ransom in fuel costs.
        It bears out the concept that reliance on renewables requires at least 40% generation from fossil fuels (or something other than renewables). It has been able to achieve good reliability.
        Notice that in order to rely on wind and solar exclusively would require 100 times as many batteries.
        What I have never been able to find out is the actual no nonsense accounting of the cost of this King Island Advance Hybrid Power Station.
        I have no difficulty in believing that it generates at less cost than the previous 100% Diesel setup.
        However that is like comparing the Taj Mahal to a longdrop.
        So far as I know, Hydro has never come completely clean with the entire cost picture, including the dose of money it got from ARENA.
        It contains a load of gear that must represent a huge capital cost. However I suspect maintenance and operating costs are less than the previous arrangement.

        40

        • #
          Peter C

          I have enquired several times of KIREIP for a cost comparison between their integrated multi source renewable power and a straight diesel plant.

          They did not reply. My assumption is that the current system costs a lot more than a straight up diesel power plant.

          80

      • #

        Not to mention that the Marginal loss factors were downgraded the most in places like Broken Hill. http://joannenova.com.au/2019/03/market-bloodbath-too-many-new-remote-renewables-projects-means-high-losses/

        An MLF below 1.0 is bad news for generators. In the extreme case of Silverton, the marginal loss factor fell from 1.0 to 0.79 which means they only get paid for 79% of what they produce

        80

      • #
        Peter C

        Rick,

        I read your submission with interest.

        You make a case for going off grid. It seems to me that your figures are based on a very low energy dwelling.

        Your system cost was $34,000 for 10kW of solar cells and 20kWh of LiPO4 batteries.

        On average your solar cells produce 40kWh/day from 4 hours sunlight. On the period during June when you had 4 days of cloudy weather you get 20kWh total from the solar cells and 20kWh total from the batteries. That is 40kWh over 4 days or 10kWh/day.

        My power consumption is about 30kWh/day. On average days your system would be just enough, but to get though June, I would have to spend $102,000 on the system, initially.

        My current power bills are about, $3200/year. So I won’t be rushing in to solar yet.

        If the cost of battery storage was a lot less it might be feasible.

        50

        • #
          RickWill

          Be aware that the pricing for the off-grid system scales what I have to supply only 3kWh per day. I have not spent $34k. My system cost $6k to meet average demand of 3kWh.

          The most economic system to go off-grid would have some fossil generation. A tiny amount of diesel or gas used for critical periods through the winter months would reduce the system capital substantially while the cost of diesel or gas would be minute.

          There would also be benefit in orientating the panels to maximise winter output rather than average output. I have 1kWh of the off-grid panels oriented to maximise winter input. The other 2kW just follow the roof slope.

          The battery prices have not dropped anywhere near the forecast rate. One factor has been the reducing value of the AUD relative to other currencies but rising lithium cost is also a factor. Irrespective, once the average grid price exceeds 40c/kWh it would be worth revisiting the off-grid option but it would need a small fossil fuelled generator to be competitive at that level (give Electricity Bill a term and that price is guaranteed). If installed battery cost get down to $200/kWh then that would tip the scale as well even at present prices.

          My off-grid LiFePO4 batteries are still going strong. I have a smaller LiFePo4 battery I use in a boat. It gets used very little but one of the cells failed internally after 6 years.

          50

          • #
            robert rosicka

            You sure don’t use much electricity Rickwill , I think we average around 22kwh .

            40

            • #
              Graeme#4

              I have noted that a few commenters refer to the average house figure of around 15 kWH/day. But I believe this figure includes a lot of residences that are not your typical 3/2 or 4/2 house. If we look at these houses, then I believe the daily usage rates would be at least 25-30 kWh/day.

              40

      • #
        yarpos

        Hornsdale has demonstrated hours of storage?

        20

        • #
          RickWill

          Hornsdale has demonstrated it can make money on price arbitrage using just 30MWh of its capacity. It has also demonstrated that it can provide frequency support services faster than rotating plant.

          In the present SA system, the benefit of batteries is to reduce the demand variation that coal plants in other states are subjected and/or the need to start high cost gas plants.

          30

    • #
      Serge Wright

      Crazy numbers indeed !

      However it should be noted that the batteries being built today are not for storage, but for short term regulation and frequency control. This is being done to comply with AEMO FCAS requirements. As you point out, the cost of storage is hideous, which is why no private investors are spending any money on storage and the only real storage being proposed is taxpayer funded Snowy 2, which will deliver 2000GW with a one week storage capacity.

      If you look at Snowy 2 as a storage model for a 100% renewables grid, then you need ~8000MW of wind nameplate capacity in order to maintain full continuous output OF 2GW. The 8000MW takes into account the losses involed in pumping water uphill. Currently, we need around 20,000MW of electricity for baseload supply and about the same amount again for peaking power. Thus, to provide current baseload supply from renewables, you’ll need at least 80,000MW of wind nameplate capacity (more if you use solar) and storage dams similar to Tantangara. For storage requirements, if you look at renewables generation for June 2017, we had a full month where wind power average was less than 50% and June is also the lowest solar generation month. If you crunch the numbers, assuming this will be the worse case weather scenario, to have a reasonably failsafe system would require 2 weeks of storage, meaning 20x Snowy 2 systems and this is just the baseload. Once you add peaking power and it’s smaller storage requirements the cost would be hideous beyond belief.

      Of course we have no chance of building 20x Snowy 2 dams and 80,000 MG of renewable capacity for baseload even if China lends us a free Trillion dollars with strings attached, because we don’t have suitable storage sites.

      As Jo points out, once the extra renewables get added, the [snip] will really hit the fan. With no storage, no solar generation at night and no wind energy for large peiods of time, we will need to keep the coal plants running 24/7, as they take 24 hours to ramp up to maximum power. Because the coal plants will need to dump much of their daytime power when solar cuts in, they will be unaffordable to run, but if they shut down, the grid will die. Watching this sceanio unfold will be more than interesting. Gas supply is also expected to run dry in a few short years due to state government bans on further exploration, meaning we only have coal for baseload.

      In terms of retail costs, these will still go up due to the huge subsidies which need to be recovered by users.

      90

    • #
      Bobl

      As I’ve pointed out numerous times, there is a further problem if you are going to build that wind farm then you need to also have the energy to supply the consumer AND charge the batteries including all the losses involved, if you have a 100 MW wind farm and back up for say 24 hours, then your maximum RELIABLE output is 40% of the minimum output over any 48 hour period ( 40% to supply Monday, then 60% stored for Tuesday supply with 20% allowed for losses). For most wind farms that’s still zero. If you have a weeks backup then it’s 14% of the minimum kWh output over any fortnight. Of course you can overbuild to charge quickly but the problem still remains, the energy needs to be put into the batteries so you can take it out later. As you increase the storage you decrease the average you can take out over the storage period.

      Because you don’t go from zero to Max there are vagarities about actual performance. But the basic problem exists you need to average the stored energy across the backup time and your reliable energy output will be 40% of the reliable input over the charging and backup periods, divided by period of backup.

      This is just physics, you will always get less out of your battery than you put into it if you want to take energy at one point and smear it across time then your output is lowered by the ratio of the charging to backup periods. Reliably the INPUT is 80% of minimum amount that can be reliably put into the battery over the charging period.

      Solar is better than wind in this respect because it’s more predictable and even when cloudy solar panels produce something.

      100

    • #
      George4

      I did a calculation based on Ausgrid (in NSW) usage figures – of around 20kWh per consumer and the cost of the SA Tesla battery.
      It showed grid scale backup of just 1 day would cost each consumer about the cost of an individual Powerall battery of around 20kWh, which makes sense.
      So $10-20K per consumer for a battery life of under 15 years.
      That is just too expensive

      90

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Basically that says the technology just isnt there, which most real engineers and scientists KNOW, maybe dont admit. Its all wet dreams for the eco nut alarmist politicians bathing in ignorance.

      90

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    The only numbers that count — the number of states with lots of solar and wind and cheap electricity. That’s Zero.

    I especially like the phrase — That’s Zero.

    Temperature change resulting from this waste of money (WOM): That’s Zero
    Sea level {mm. or inches} rise this WOM will prevent: That’s Zero.
    Polar Bears saved: That’s Zero.

    Thanks for the smile today.

    300

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      Renewables and their subsidised production are a fact, but they are only part of the story

      So in the olden days, electricity was produced, distributed and sold by the state. This also enabled long term investment in both generation capacity, typified by Snowy Hydro and the large efficient coal fired generators in the Latrobe and Hunter, and in the physical grid. The yearly budget was forecast opex + forecast capex which would roughly equal revenue.

      Nowadays, The generator’s budget is forecast opex + forecast capex + forecast profit, the distributor’s budget is forecast opex + forecast capex + forecast profit, and the retailer’s budget is forecast opex + forecast capex + forecast profit. Some companies also get the benefit of vertical integration like AGL and Snowy Hydro.

      How is that better for the poor consumer?

      101

      • #
        George4

        SA was privatised in 1999.
        Prices were steady afterwards til 2007 when all states showed steady increases in the price index.
        This coincided with the advent of renewables.

        https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-25/electricity-chart-2/6346834

        The data shows no clear link between electricity bills and privatisation.

        https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-25/fact-check-does-privatisation-increase-electricity-prices3f/6329316

        60

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          George4 – SA did a 25% jump around 2002, after 2007 input costs for coas and gas increased by 40%. renewables have an affect, but there is more than just renewables in play

          61

          • #
            Graeme#4

            You may be correct Peter. I note that Perth and Darwin had a similar but smaller rise, and both these states have a low amount of renewables – in WA’s case, I believe it’s around 11-12%. Might be a case of these states charging what they think consumers will bear.

            30

      • #
        Karabar

        How, you ask?
        Because the private sector can always operate more efficiently than the government.
        Yours is just the old leftist argument that “profit is bad”.

        61

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          It’s certainly been efficient in extracting its profit. These are natural monopolies operating in a regulated framework. Since you can’t build a duplicate generation and network system, classic capitalism does not apply. Can you point to more efficient operations? Faster delivery of electrons perhaps? The old system produced very cheap power, and then we meddled.

          81

      • #
        RickWill

        The State owned power supply enterprises were inefficient. The unions held huge bargaining power. Joh B-P was the first power supply asset owner to challenge the union grip and got some sense back into power pricing in the early 1980s. However the real benefits flowed a decade after that with the formation of the national grid and removing the state monopolies on cross property boundaries and state borders for the sale of electricity. Some of the trading practices in the electricity supply industry were actually unconstitutional. Throughout the 1990s the average electricity price in Australia fell.

        The falling price trend ended once intermittents were given priority market access. It was dramatically boosted with Rudd’s increase of the RET. Since then prices have continued the upward spiral apart from a brief reprieve with Abbott’s effort to remove the carbon tax and reduce the RET.

        70

      • #
        John F. Hultquist

        P. F. says “So in the olden days, electricity was produced, distributed and sold by the state.

        That may be true in Australia, but in the USA, systems were established in towns or parts of towns by the few folks that had a little money, and the entrepreneurial spirit. This is the same way grist mills were established, sometimes by the same folks.
        There are now Public Utility Districts (PUDs) within states that provide several services, but while allowed by the State, they are not ‘the state’ as implied by your comment.
        My PUD buys power from a producer (locally a large dam) and redistributes that electricity with a system it builds and maintains.
        What we pay for this:
        From central Washington State
        Residential rate, monthly
        Facilities Charge . . . . . $21.25
        Energy Charge … . . . . $0.0908/kWh

        40

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Jo you forgot the important point of the ABC article having a Coal power station photo with its chimney stacks against low sunlight giving the illusion of steam as smoke.

    So a planet saving electrical replacement scheme turns out to be very expensive, not a viable replacement and can only operate with money from taxpayers and public assets.

    Next thing someone will be doing the same with electric cars………

    150

    • #
      David Wojick

      Belching smokestacks have become an art form. The art of deception!

      See https://www.google.com/search?q=belching+smokestacks&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS801US801&hl=en-US&prmd=simvn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwit2-vy4e7hAhXBxlkKHamwDq0Q_AUoAnoECAwQAg&biw=1024&bih=653

      My personal favorites are the ones that turn out to be nuclear power plant cooling towers. At one point one was featured on the home page of a green certificate issuing outfit.

      120

      • #
        Yonniestone

        David I find it astonishing that a large percentage of the public don’t know that Industrial scrubber systems have been used for over fifty years, in fact the first CO2 scrubber was used in the Ictíneo I a pioneering submarine constructed in Barcelona, Spain in 1858–1859 by engineer Narcís Monturiol.

        From Link;
        He invented a chemical air scrubber to remove carbon dioxide from the interior by forcing the air through a container of calcium hydroxide, thus allowing the vessel to remain underwater for longer periods. He also devised a method of producing oxygen which unfortunately proved impractical because it also produced sulfuric acid as a byproduct. For interior illumination he used a simple candle, which had the advantage of turning red when oxygen was beginning to run low and so alerted the crew.

        So a Spanish Engineer from 1858 has a greater understanding of basic chemistry than any highly hyped and paid CAGW climate scientists, who ever said history is never forgotten?

        140

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        They always us the cooling towers belching ‘nasty smoke’, harmless steam, as a symbol of CO2 ‘pollution’. Its playing to the ignorant masses who dont think.

        80

        • #
          Yonniestone

          I’ve personally worked on two wet scrubber systems and seen the maintenance procedures carried out, the level of compliance to government standards is very strict with inspections of monitoring records made at any time, anyone that thinks producing steam vapour and treated water clean enough to be pumped out to sea from harmful chemicals need to look at the process before making judgements based on MSM drivel.

          80

      • #
        John F. Hultquist

        D. W. says “. . . an art form .”

        Indeed. Search using an ‘images’ tag for – painted cooling towers -

        30

    • #

      Re ABC and BBC supporting cli-sci consensuss, a letter to the BBC sent by Geoff Chambers at Climate Scepticism re that story of Attenborough and the Flying Walrus Circus that Jo also covered.

      https://cliscep.com/2019/04/26/cliscep-v-the-bbc-round-1/#comment-36757

      100

  • #
    HAS

    NZ is still part of the world as I recall. Oz a miserly 1MWh per head renewable generation if the graph’s to be believed. NZ about 8.5MWh if my sums are right. Pull your socks up Oz

    60

    • #
      Dennis

      Yes, but Australia has moved forward from the transition to renewable energy to the transition to electric vehicles and will be ahead of New Zealand.

      sarc

      70

    • #
      Robber

      And that would be hydro in NZ right? A reliable renewable”.

      80

      • #
        HAS

        Not much wrong with hydro. Also good geothermal, and don’t tell the tourists but some of the best wind in the world (particularly with hydro in support).

        Problem is in early winter, hydro and wind can run low before the spring thaw and the equinoctial gales. Probably always going to have to burn stuff.

        PV is of marginal interest – we’ll have to leave that for the Ozzies.

        (Of perhaps slight interest there’s a paper floating around that suggests the aggregate exploitable wind resource in NZ is as great as that of all of Australia. If you believe it.)

        70

        • #
          theRealUniverse

          Average wind in NZ is much higher than Aus, except maybe during cyclones. One mountain ridge in Aorangi(Mt Cook) Nat Park has wins over 200kph regularly when a front passes through. Good place for a wind farm I reckon….

          40

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            I agree, but as wind farms have to shut down at less than half that wind speed I don’t expect one to be built there anytime soon.

            50

        • #
          Karabar

          The consumer expects electricity that is affordable, reliable, secure, and of otherwise excellent quality.
          No renewable can produce all of these parameters; not even hydro.
          Remember the wholesale price in NZ in early 2000 when the reservoirs were near empty.
          The wholesale price skyrocketed, and there is no doubt that there would have been blackouts had it not been for natural gas.
          The same performance was repeated in Tasmania in late 2015.

          40

    • #
      Robber

      And that would be hydro in NZ right? A reliable renewable”.

      51

    • #
      Russell

      Don’t forget the other NZ reliable renewable component of geothermal energy. Sitting on “the ring of fire” has to be of some benefit to NZ.

      20

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        Yes but they never exploited the geothermal reserves at Wairakei only played experiment with them. I was told by one engineer that if they fixed the leaks they would get alot more out of it, many years ago. The Japanese have done better with geothermal than Kiwis have done.

        30

        • #
          HAS

          The Japanese have an installed capacity of 535MW, NZ 854MW (h/t Wikipedia). Clearly our MWs must be smaller than theirs.

          Perhaps it’s the exchange rate?

          20

          • #
            theRealUniverse

            I never checked the numbers recently, ..maybe NZ has added a few I was talking about info from 20 years back. When I was last through there there was allot of steam about…;)

            30

    • #
      BoyfromTottenham

      Yes, HAS, but you Kiwis have several advantages vs Oz – far more of NZ is suitable for building hydro dams, you have more rain & snowmelt runoff, in a far smaller country, with a similarly smaller population. Take a close at Oz on Google Earth and you will understand – you guys were dealt a handful of aces vs our deuces! And you have more trout!

      50

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        Boy from T, we also have rope-tows strung from the sides of alpine basins on the Main Divide which you have walk up to for an hour – there is a goods lift which takes your overnight gear and food and liquor and boards/skis up to the lodges. The view next morning when you step outside (if it’s not a complete whiteout) is other-worldly –

        https://www.metservice.com/skifields/temple-basin

        Over 60 cm [2 feet} of global warming powder is expected to fall during the next 72 hours. And a whole bunch of rain lower down. And trout…

        20

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has published an event report on the load shedding events that occurred during concurrent heatwaves in South Australia and Victoria in January 2019.

    AEMO has today published an event report on the load shedding events that occurred during concurrent heatwaves in South Australia and Victoria on Thursday 24 January 2019 and in Victoria on Friday 25 January 2019.

    Victoria and South Australia experienced record-breaking temperatures on 24 and 25 January, coinciding with the loss of up to 1,600 megawatts (MW) of available thermal generation resources.

    http://energylive.aemo.com.au/News/AEMO-summer-operations-event-report?fbclid=IwAR09Y4LTcWWJOLepWYhW0b4Y6ER6pYIWr0ZeFEz4n4p_i0LFeQt5PQskbME

    Wait. What?

    There is record breaking temperatures?

    Solar takes biggest chunk out of grid emissions over summer

    https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-takes-biggest-chunk-out-of-grid-emissions-over-summer-51265/

    50

    • #
      Travis T. Jones

      abc- SA power: What is load shedding and why is it happening?

      On Wednesday night, after the mercury tipped 42 degrees Celsius in Adelaide, 90,000 homes and businesses had their power shut off for 45 minutes, in a process called load shedding, because there was not enough supply to meet demand.

      With fewer traditional coal and gas generators in the market, the state (SA) has less capacity to generate energy on demand.

      This is a problem when demand is high and the wind isn’t blowing.

      Is this just an issue for SA?

      No.

      The AEMO is warning of potential load shedding in New South Wales on Friday as it braces for an extreme heatwave.

      The problem is likely to get worse in the medium term with the closure of Victoria’s Hazelwood brown coal power station.

      What’s the solution?

      South Australia needs more sources of power that can be dispatched on demand.

      Local authorities are already investigating the possibility of an additional interconnector to NSW, Victoria or Queensland.

      If they decide to proceed, the solution will take years and cost power users billions of dollars.

      https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-09/sa-power-what-is-load-shedding-and-why-is-it-happening/8254508

      Here’s a clue: “The market for electricity is much tighter in South Australia since the closure of the state’s sole coal-fired power plant in Port Augusta, Northern, last year.”

      140

      • #
        Bobl

        You forgot, and will generate megatonnes of CO2 for all the steel, aluminium and concrete. It will remove hundreds of hectares of carbon sinks (using CO2 belching machinery) along the powerline easement to minimise bushfire risks, a process repeated every few years to keep it clear.

        Yep, let’s increase the CO2 footprint so we can decrease the CO2 footprint…. sounds like green logic to me.

        80

        • #
          theRealUniverse

          “Yep, let’s increase the CO2 footprint” Well at least the bush will love you for it.
          As for load shedding , so it gets a wee bit warm..turn your air-con up to max, then BANG no power! Thats how it works.

          50

  • #
    el gordo

    Was climate change and renewables an important part of the NSW and Vic elections?

    ‘Climate change featured as an important, if not decisive, battleground issue in both the recent Victorian and New South Wales State elections. After the Easter break, reports of record high voter enrolments, particularly among young people, indicates that climate change may firm as a key federal election issue as May 18 draws nearer.

    ‘Almost 16.4 million Australians are on the Australian electoral role as the country heads towards a federal election that will prove decisive to the renewable sector over the next three years. The Australian Electoral Commission made the announcement today, noting that 100,000 people signed up to vote in the lead up to the rolls closing.

    “A national enrolment rate of 96.8% was for a long time thought to be unattainable,” Electoral Commissioner, Tom Rogers said in a statement.’

    PV Magazine

    50

    • #
      yarpos

      Certainly important to my vote. As soon as someone spouts BS like two Hazelwoods of renewabke power, they arent getting my vote and will be bottom preferenced.

      120

    • #
      RickWill

      From PV-Magazine:

      Almost 16.4 million Australians are on the Australian electoral role as the country heads towards a federal election that will prove decisive to the renewable sector over the next three years. The Australian Electoral Commission made the announcement today, noting that 100,000 people signed up to vote in the lead up to the rolls closing.

      I would be reasonably confident that the AEC did not make such an announcement. If they did then they need to find a new role for the current individual preparing their press releases.

      110

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘…noting that 100,000 people signed up to vote in the lead up to the rolls closing.’

        New immigrants perhaps?

        ‘…when it comes to politics, a greater proportion of Asian-born Millennials intend to vote Liberal – particularly Chinese- and Indian-born.’

        Roy Morgan

        40

        • #
          yarpos

          new citizens and people turning 18 I guess, oh yeah and Russians, there must be Russians

          40

          • #
            el gordo

            ‘The Australian Bureau of Statistics wrote this week that after English, “the next most common languages spoken at home were Mandarin, Arabic, Cantonese, and Vietnamese”. Half of all Australians were either born overseas or have one or both parents who were. The median age for those with an Asian heritage is 35 and under.’

            South China Morning Post

            30

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Greg Hunt goes green again … Victorians pay …

    Candidates vying for the federal seat of Flinders, held by the Liberals’ Greg Hunt, are all united in their opposition to AGL’s Gas Import Jetty Project at Crib Point and have vowed to help stop the project from going ahead.

    At a candidates forum on Wednesday night attended by about 70 people, Mr Hunt, Labor’s Josh Sinclair, Greens’ Nathan Lesslie, and independent candidates Julia Banks and Susie Beveridge were questioned on their position … All five said they were opposed to AGL’s project …

    The energy provider is planning a project to import liquefied natural gas via Western Port Bay.

    But locals have described the proposal as futile, saying Australia is the world’s biggest gas exporter.

    https://www.theage.com.au/federal-election-2019/flinders-battle-heats-up-as-voters-home-in-on-agl-gas-project-20190418-p51f80.html

    51

    • #
      Dennis

      Australia is the world’s biggest gas exporter but Australians, thanks to the export agreement arranged by Prime Minister Gillard and Treasurer Swan allows export orders to be filled before Australian consumers are served.

      110

    • #
      AndyG55

      Australia has LARGE reserves of gas that haven’t even been touched yet. Same with coal.

      Importing ? Seriously?

      If leftist governments got out the way and let gas extraction proceed, there would be no need to even consider it.

      151

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        The powers that be would rather see population reduced, and then have it all to themselves….

        If you read the many writings of the the NWO mob, they would like to see a 95% population reduction, through a huge war between …ahem…..civilizations.

        So if renewables can only do 5% of total power demand now, but you then reduce down population down to 5%…well….

        Kind of an eerie thought.

        50

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        Im sure most places in the world have large gas reserves its planet wide, just some countries its geologically hard or too expensive to extract. Same with oil, its a ‘geo fluke’ if you have easy to get at fields.

        70

    • #
      James Murphy

      when they say “import”, they mean getting gas from WA by ship rather than pipeline – but I am happy to be corrected on this.

      regardless, it’s a ridiculous situation, but one which is not surprising given the idiocy of the Victorian premier.

      100

      • #
        yarpos

        That would seem like common sense , but the last I heard the gas will go all the way out and all the way back. More to do with sale priorities, long term contracts and logistics. Victorian Premier, yep. He has moments of lucidity, but they are getting fewer and fewer.

        70

      • #
        Graeme#4

        The companies that want to import gas into Victoria say that building a pipeline is too expensive, but they never show the comparison cost calculations. WA built a 1400 km gas pipeline in one year for $400m. I believe that a pipeline could be built from either the WA’s NW or NT with similar distances for about the same cost.
        The main problem then would be demanding additional gas reservation policies to supply domestic gas at cheaper than export values.

        20

  • #
    Robert Swan

    If the ABC served the other half of the nation …

    Surely a much greater portion than half is ill-served by the ABC. More like the proverbial 97%.

    ABC climate propaganda divides the nation into three groups: (1) those who believe it, (2) those who don’t believe it and resent paying, and (3) those who benefit from pretending to believe. Group (3) is the only one well served by the ABC.

    121

  • #
    Ruairi

    With renewables for greenies a must,
    Australia is bound to go bust,
    When it’s now undeniable,
    That ther’re so unreliable,
    As their once mighty grids bite the dust.

    180

  • #
    Bruce of Newcastle

    That graph is amazing.
    I work out that the added generation in 2018 was about 6000 GWh more than the previous year. That is close to two thirds of a GW – or one third of Liddell power station when new.
    Since the capital cost is ahead of the generation I’ll take the 2017 capital spend seeing that wind and solar are pretty quick to build. Which seems to fit the relative shapes of the two datasets.
    That means $12 billion for about 680 MW of actual generation (24hr basis).
    Holy cow that is expensive!
    At least 5 times the cost of equivalent HELE plants, let alone a non-HELE 1:1 Liddell replacement.
    No wonder electricity prices are going through the roof.

    150

    • #
      RickWill

      You make the mistake of comparing intermittent actual generation with dispatchable power generation. The figure goes up much more than 5 times if you want dispatchable power from the intermittent generators. If it was only 5 times the capital it might even be worth considering because there is no fuel cost with intermittents.

      Of course the other factor is the operating life of the assets. Wind is subjected to very wide range of cyclic load conditions. Getting 20 years life is proving challenging. Solar is not quite so challenging providing the hail stones are smaller than 20mm diameter.

      130

  • #
    AndyG55

    Yesterday I posted a graph of German Solar %time vs %nameplate.

    I have just gone back and checked the data.

    It is actually just for onshore wind

    There was also data for German grid solar.

    Here is the graph of %time vs %nameplate for onshore wind for 2015, 2016

    and here is the graph of %time vs %nameplate for solar 2015, 2016

    As you can see, the capacity factor of German onshore was around 20%, (as quoted by renewable shills) but its the pattern of delivery that is the real problem. It was less than that 20% for some 60% of the time.

    Solar graph.. laughable to say the least.

    90

    • #
      AndyG55

      Might be interesting to see a graph for our East coast coal fired power. ;-)

      30

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      AndyG55:

      Some years ago someone – I think on Bishop Hill – pointed out that on-shore wind in Germany had a capacity factor below 18%. To get around 20% I would suggest that this is a graph of on-shore and off-shore wind combined. Bear in mind that some off-shore plants have had difficulties getting power connections….all those careless people who leave old bombs lying on the ocean floor.

      70

      • #
        AndyG55

        Its over 2 years ago I got that data, so I can’t be absolutely sure.

        Somewhere in that range 18-20% on shore, looks about right.

        Its still basically PATHETIC. !

        52

  • #
    Bill in Oz

    I was listening to Naked Scientists last night.
    They had a discussion about the quack science
    of ‘Phrenology” and “Phrenologists’
    It was the pseudo science that said i
    It was possible to assess the character of persons
    by the bumps on their skulls !!

    It was Popular from around 1810-1840.

    And then exposed as fake & died.

    I have a suggestion
    Whenever we wish to talk about
    Climate Science & Climate Scientist

    Let’s instead say & write
    ‘Climate Phrenology’
    & ‘Climate Phrenologists’.

    Climate Science is a dopey
    perversion of science

    So it is right to use mockery.
    Mockery is a powerful weapon
    In the propaganda war against
    the Global warming scare.

    100

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Just keep asking for proof of their predictions coming true……

      Shuts them up every time because they cant name any.

      70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Then there was Mesmerism (hypnosis) about the same time. Hypnotised seems a better description of most of the believers.
      Then there were the Millerites who gathered on a hilltop, not once but twice to await the end of the World. Even after that there were a remnant who still believed it would happen soon.
      And of course, there are still people who believe that the World was created in 4004BC (meaning that humans and dinosaurs cohabited the Earth).
      Shows that a goodly proportion of humans are gullible and/or hysterical. Or badly educated.

      40

  • #
    New Chum

    On page 4 of a letter to shareholders the Commonwealth Bank disclosed that it is a key financier of the Sapphire Wind Farm and has signed a 12 year Power Purchasing Agreement.

    Working towards a low carbon future We have signed a 12 year Power Purchasing Agreement with the largest wind farm in New South Wales to cut our costs, lower our emissions and increase our competitiveness. The majority of CBA’s NSW and ACT operations will be powered by renewable electricity in 2019 with 96,000 MWh of clean power sourced directly from Sapphire Wind Farm. This transition will reduce our carbon emissions by 60% and save on energy costs. CBA is a key financier of Sapphire Wind Farm which will generate enough energy to power an estimated 115,000 households and offset 700,000 tonnes of carbon emissions per year. To further reinforce our commitment to a lower carbon future, we have also become the first Australian corporate to join the global RE100 initiative – setting a goal to source 100% of our electricity consumption from renewable electricity by 2030. Environment 65% CBA is now sourcing nearly two thirds of its national electricity needs from renewable energy

    https://stocknessmonster.com/announcements/cba.asx-2A1141257/

    100

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      “Working towards a low carbon future total destruction of industrial society..”

      120

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        The joke is that 17,407,872 tons of CO2 would be in order of 1 molecule per 100 billion in the total atmosphere! insane.

        90

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      To supply 115,000 homes at 18kw per hour (average usage) would mean 18,133,200 MWh per year. At 960 kg per MWh (maximum from NSW coal fied stations) that is 17,407,872 tons of CO2. 700,000 tons saved therefore represents a CF of 4.0%.
      Seems bloody inefficient.

      60

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      Wouldn’t some, at least, of those claims be false? e.g. “The majority of CBA’s NSW and ACT operations will be powered by renewable energy in 2019…”? (Admittedly, while implied, the word “exclusively” is not included.) And isn’t it a significant offence to make false claims in a letter to shareholders?
      Cheers
      Dave B

      80

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        And doesn’t it also mean that their due diligence group is incompetent, as we know that achieving 100% is impossible? There’s enough evidence to prove that just in today’s set of replies here.
        Cheers
        Dave B

        70

    • #
      yarpos

      The CBA to its credit was one of the banks not to outsource overseas. When its data centres are busily doing its overnight batch jobs at 2am to 6am , I wonder how much of that is done with renewable energy?

      50

  • #
    pat

    Reuters trying to help Senvion drum up some interest!

    26 Apr: Reuters: Private equity, rivals looking into buying Senvion: CEO
    by Alexander Hübner
    Large wind turbine companies and private equity firms are interested in buying insolvent German group Senvion, Chief Executive Yves Rannou told Reuters in an interview published on Friday.
    “We see significant interest for Senvion from across the board – from financial investors, from strategic parties in the sector, and beyond,” he said, adding that Senvion had mandated Rothschild to find an investor.

    “I am positively surprised by how many companies are looking at us, including the big players in our sector who are looking very closely,” he added…
    Rannou reiterated this objective in the interview, adding: “I see light at the end of the tunnel.”
    Wind turbine manufacturers are having to build up scale to cut costs after the industry saw a rapid decline in revenue as it moves away from guaranteed subsidies toward auction-based systems that favor the lowest bidders.
    Senvion last week agreed a 100 million euro ($111.32 million) 12-month loan with banks and hedge funds to stay afloat and continue operations.

    Asked about the workforce, Rannou said he could not gauge how many of the 4,000 employees may stay on board…
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-senvion-m-a/private-equity-rivals-looking-into-buying-senvion-ceo-idUSKCN1S216T

    30

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Intersting to see that dip was for the Abbot years.
    Looks like the end of the curve follows the so called increase in CO2. Probably due to hitting the eco-panic button.

    40

    • #
      RickWill

      Abbott created “policy uncertainty”; meaning government mandated largesse for intermittents was threatened and expensive penalties for coal generators were removed.

      Shorten will provide “policy certainty”; meaning upping the RET and discouraging investment in coal and coal fuelled generation.

      I wonder how history will treat Malcolm Turnbull and his conflict of interest on energy policy!

      90

      • #
        yarpos

        Funny isnt it that “certainty” that you wont be getting other peoples money is bad.

        While “certainty” that you will get other peoples money is good.

        This leads me to think that perhaps its not about “certainty” at all.

        60

  • #
    pat

    26 Apr: GreentechMedia: The Challenging Path Forward for Western Turbine OEMs in China
    The recent failure of western turbine suppliers to secure any deals out of a 6-gigawatt Chinese wind power auction underscores their long road ahead in the world’s largest market
    by Angel Hang
    News came recently that three western wind turbine manufacturers, namely GE, Siemens Gamesa and Vestas, failed to take (WIN?) a single bite of the 6-gigawatt auction for wind power in Ulanqab, Inner Mongolia. The project is the world’s largest in wind capacity and is being developed by SPIC, one of China’s top state-owned power producers. Chinese companies SEWPG (SEwind), Goldwind, CSIC Haizhuang, Mingyang and DEC all won wind turbine orders from the auction.

    Commenting on the bidding results, Xiaoyang Li, Senior Analyst at Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables was not surprised. “The preference for local Chinese manufacturers and premiums of up to 40 percent in bidding pricing prevented them [western OEMs] from winning,” Li said…

    The absence of western OEMs in world’s largest wind farm brings up many questions on how they could grow their presence in China’s wind power market, or whether they are in terminal decline in the country. Western turbine OEMs in the Chinese market are faced with growing challenges, according to new research from Wood Mackenzie Power and Renewables.
    Vestas, GE and Siemens Gamesa are now the only three non-Chinese manufacturers vying for market share there, while several others have exited for various reasons. The combined market share in China for these three majors fell to just 5 percent in 2018. Vestas gained 2.9 percent market share, the highest of the foreign OEMs…

    Given the existing policy conditions and competitive landscape, western players will be increasingly challenged to gain market share against local competitors.
    https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/the-challenging-path-forward-for-western-turbine-oems-in-china

    26 Apr: WindPowerMonthly: Indian downturn hits manufacturing production
    by Suuhas Tenddulkar
    India has seen nearly 10GW of capacity awarded under the auction mode since early 2017. But the implementation of these capacities is significantly lagging.
    New additions of 1.7GW in 2017-18 and 1.52GW in 2018-19 are not reflective of the awarded capacity and are also in stark contrast to the record of 5GW+ capacity added before the auctions were introduced.

    The main reason for the lack of demand is that many bid winners have still not finalised turbine purchase contracts.
    Even where contracts are confirmed, the actual implementation and turbine deliveries have been significantly delayed on account of grid access and land allocation issues.
    This slowdown has caused significant pressure in the local turbine manufacturing industry.
    An official from the Indian Wind Turbine Manufacturers Association (IWTMA), said the process is being slowed by auctions not requiring a pre-bid contract with OEMs…

    Recent turbine awards show foreign players like Senvion, Vestas, and GE have been also able to wrestle supply contracts, shrinking the size of the pie for entrenched players like Suzlon, Inox wind, and Siemens Gamesa.
    A silver lining in this scenario is the prospect of exports.

    Siemens Gamesa, which has a large manufacturing set-up in India, recently started exporting blades to Americas.
    According to Ramesh Kymal, SGRE’s country chief, manufacturing in India can provide significant cost benefits for exports, especially in processes that require large amounts of manual labour.
    https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1583075/indian-downturn-hits-manufacturing-production

    50

  • #
    pat

    short but sweet:

    27 Apr: Bloomberg: The Biggest U.S. Market for Tiny Wind Farms Isn’t the Breeziest
    By Gerald Porter Jr.
    Turns out the best place to install a small turbine in the U.S. isn’t the Plains, where winds blow the strongest, but the Northeast where the incentives are better…
    In fact, the Northeast, along with the West Coast, have some of the most robust policies encouraging renewable energy development, and that’s what’s driving the installations, said Mike Bergey, chief executive officer of turbine supplier Bergey Windpower.

    “If it was related to wind, Montana or Wyoming would be in the lead,” he said, but “New York and Massachusetts in particular have been aggressive on promoting clean energy at both large and small scale.”…
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-26/the-biggest-u-s-market-for-tiny-wind-farms-isn-t-the-breeziest

    60

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      As far as clean energy goes gas and hydro lead by farthest. Windlessbines are the dirtiest and most useless, of course next to not least solar.

      90

    • #
      RickWill

      The error here is in the name “Wind Farms”. The correct name is “Subsidy Farm”. Once the correct name is used, it becomes obvious the why farmers go to the place where the subsidies are easiest to farm.

      100

  • #
    pat

    26 Apr: Daily Caller: The Green New Deal woud cause ‘significant environmental damage’, report finds
    •The Green New Deal would cause “significant environmental damage” and require “massive land use,” according to a new report.
    by Michael Bastasch
    The report (LINK), by American Enterprise Institute scholar Benjamin Zycher, claims the Green New Deal championed by many 2020 Democratic presidential candidates would come with its own set of environmental issues from rapidly expanding renewable energy.
    “There is the heavy-metal pollution created by the production process for wind turbines,” Zycher wrote in his report, which was released Wednesday.
    “There are the noise and flicker effects of wind turbines. There are the large problems of solar panel waste and toxic metals. There is the wildlife destruction caused by the production of renewable power,” Zycher wrote.

    Zycher’s conservative estimate of the Green New Deal’s total cost is about $9 trillion a year. The conservative American Action Forum reported in February the Green New Deal could cost $93 trillion (LINK) over 10 years..
    However, there are a lot of uncertainties when estimating the Green New Deal’s costs, and the $93 trillion figure has come under scrutiny (LINK) in recent weeks…
    For starters, the Green New Deal is more a list of broad goals than a detailed policy plan…

    But a price can be put on the straightforward Green New Deal goals, like massively ramping up renewable energy.
    “A highly conservative estimate of the aggregate cost of that set of policies would be $490.5 billion per year, permanently, or $3,845 per year per household,” Zycher wrote.
    “This would be accompanied by significant environmental damage — there is nothing clean about ‘clean’ electricity — and massive land use,” Zycher wrote…
    However, drastically expanding renewable energy, which would largely come from wind and solar, presents its own environmental challenges.

    For example, wind turbines currently kill 1 million migratory birds every year, according to the American Bird Conservancy. Rotating blades threaten rare hawks and eagles, as do massive solar arrays that are beginning to dot the desert southwest.
    Transmission lines needed to get wind and solar power from windswept plans on sizzling deserts to population centers would kill even more birds, experts warn. Solar farms need to clear large swaths of land of trees and wildlife.
    Zycher also highlighted the massive amounts of land that would be needed to power the U.S. with renewable electricity, largely from wind and solar. Zycher estimated 115.2 million acres, or 180,000 square miles would be needed to meet U.S. energy needs.
    “[T]hat is over 15 percent greater than the land area of California,” Zycher wrote. “This does not include transmission lines or other attendant infrastructure.”
    https://dailycaller.com/2019/04/26/green-new-deal-environmental-damage/

    50

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    I thought it was spring for you northerners up in the NH?
    Via iceagenow
    https://www.weather.gov/tfx/ ‘cold nights and snow starting tonight…’ ‘cold temps will be hard on spring vegetation’
    So a warmer atmosphere would be a disaster?
    I predict a cold summer in the NH. BUT I will expect heatwaves and record highs ‘Will be found’.

    90

  • #
    pat

    26 Apr: KTLA: CNN: San Diego County Residents Trying to Stop Proposed Wind Farm
    People who live in Boulevard, about an hour east of San Diego, are worried that a proposed wind turbine project could disrupt their quality of life, and also lead to health problems.
    Right now, the Campo Wind project would build 60 turbines on land owned by the Campo Kumeyaay Nation. The U.S. Department of the Interior is drafting an Environmental Impact Statement.
    According to federal documents, the turbines would each be 586 feet tall. The rotors would have a diameter of 450 feet.
    The project would also include the construction of a new collection substation and a 230 kV overhead transmission line to connect it with the Sunrise Powerlink.

    People who live near the Campo land say those turbines would ruin the views that drew them to the East County.
    “We sacrifice a lot to live out in the country. We wear out vehicles, we drive an hour to work,” Boulevard resident Monica Fordyce said. “But we love our view. We want it to remain pristine.”
    At 586 feet tall, the turbines would dwarf the tallest buildings in Downtown San Diego. One America Plaza stands at 500 feet tall, the Symphony Tower is 499 feet tall and the Manchester Grand Hyatt is 497 feet tall. The SeaWorld Tower is 320 feet tall.

    The view isn’t the only issue. Donna Tisdale, who is the president of the Boulevard Planning Group and also the activist group Backcountry Against Dumps says the windmills can cause health problems for people who live nearby.
    “It’s an invisible pollution, and most people don’t recognize it,” she says. “They may suffer from sleep deprivation, or heart issues unexplained. I think there are a lot more people out here that are affected by the turbines and not know it.”

    In February, the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency put out a report stating that “wind turbines are not related to adverse health effects.” It did state that they could cause added stress which could lead to health problems.
    Tisdale and her group say they disagree with the report. They’re asking the county to revisit the findings and look at new information. They even had their lawyer send letters to the County and the US Department of the Interior about the issue.

    The County Planning Commission will discuss the report at their meeting on Friday, April 26th at 9 a.m.
    10News in San Diego reached out to the offices of the Campo Kumeyaay Nation for comment on the project. They have not responded.
    https://ktla.com/2019/04/26/san-diego-county-residents-trying-to-stop-proposed-wind-farm/

    50

  • #
    David Maddison

    Just imagine if the money invested in unreliables was invested in something useful.

    110

    • #
      yarpos

      I have no idea how all this madness will end up, but if anyone looks at opportunity costs then you would think the people that promoted all that waste would end up facing crimes against humanity charges.

      For all the trillions of $ wasted how many millions could have had clean water, freedom from prentable disease, some basic light in the evening and somwhere to go to the toilet?

      Looking at you Al Gore.

      80

    • #
      Ghibli Levante

      Just imagine if the USD4.8 billion expended daily on the military was invested in something useful like clean water and disease treatment and eradication and a decent standard of living for everyone.

      You know who should be facing charges of crimes against humanity and it ain’t Al Gore.

      When I see you on a street corner singing “Give Peace A Chance” I’ll take you seriously.

      28

      • #
        AndyG55

        So 50+ billion a year in US aid isn’t enough, hey!

        You expect the USA to look after everyone.

        Waiting for a hand-out…

        Waiting for socialism…

        … you poor thing.

        82

        • #
          Ghibli Levante

          Where did I mention the USA ?

          USD4.8 billion per day is spent globally: a quick check on google would confirm that. And that figure doesn’t include the cost of repairing broken bodies or rebuilding cities.

          Trump also wants to increase military expenditure and cut foreign aid. He also wants to walk away from the International Arms Trade Treaty: Big money in bombs and bullets.

          I can only assume from your comments that you are happy for humanity to continue on a destructive path while your misguided ideology tells you investment in clean energy generation is a waste of money. Strange to say the least.

          And what has Socialism got to do with it?

          You really need to put your brain in gear before you hit the keyboard.

          21

  • #
    pat

    lengthy, worth a read:

    26 Apr: Reuters: Going Dutch on clean energy? Polluters push for state to split the bill
    by Bart H. Meijer
    AMSTERDAM – In a meeting at the economic affairs ministry in The Hague late last year, Tata Steel’s Dutch chief Theo Henrar pledged he would spend hundreds of millions of euros to cut factory emissions – on condition the government invested a similar amount.
    The proposal from the industrial giant, which has not been made public, comes against the backdrop of global wrangling between governments and corporations over who should foot the bill to ensure countries meet tough climate targets.
    It is an example of how big companies in the Netherlands and beyond are putting forward their own plans to reduce emissions as they look to ward off the carbon taxes they fear will hammer their businesses, or at least see them softened…

    Paul van der Zanden, spokesman for the economic affairs ministry, which includes climate policy, declined to comment on Tata’s proposals. But he said a national corporate carbon emissions tax was needed to make sure industrial companies delivered reductions.
    The government will in June outline its strategy for switching the country – among the most polluting in the European Union – to more sustainable sources of energy.
    A key part of the strategy will be laying out who will pay for the estimated costs of 1.5 to 3 billion euros per year until 2050, for measures such as insulating buildings, promoting electric vehicles and increasing the supply of sustainable energy, including building offshore wind farms.
    A growing number of politicians and voters(?) favor a tough carbon tax on polluting companies…

    In the Netherlands, it is not just Tata Steel. In a separate proposal, Tata, Dow Chemical, another of the biggest polluters, and fellow steelmaker ArcelorMittal have together pitched a 1.3-billion-euro project to the government that would see Dow using gases from steel factories in its chemical plants to make plastics, reducing its need for fossil fuels.
    The companies are willing to invest heavily in the project, Henrar said, but they want the state to subsidize initial loss-making phases. The economy ministry declined to comment…

    The Netherlands is home to many large industries, Europe’s main seaport and an abundant supply of cheap natural gas. As a result, less than 7 percent of all energy used came from sustainable sources in 2017, compared to 15 percent in Germany and over half of all energy in Sweden.
    The government has pledged to halve CO2 emissions from 1990 levels by 2030, but by 2017 had only achieved a 13 percent cut…
    “The Netherlands is further behind on all of its goals than the rest of the EU,” the government’s top climate adviser, Pieter Boot, told Reuters in an interview. “We have simply done too little in the past 20 years.”
    That inaction led to a court ruling last year, in a case brought by climate activists, ordering the government to reduce CO2 emissions by 25 percent by the end of 2020…

    Economists and climate experts are united in their support for a carbon tax, saying it is crucial if the country is to meet its commitments.
    The Dutch central bank said an additional tax of 50 euros per tonne CO2 would not significantly harm the Dutch economy, although acknowledged that steel and chemicals makers would lose clients to international competitors.
    (Dutch Prime Minister Mark) Rutte said the tax would be “reasonable” and would not chase business away, but gave no further details…

    However big business fears the worst.
    “A tax does not stimulate companies to make unprofitable investments,” said Hans Gruenfeld, head of industry lobby group VEMW. “The Dutch are trying to get companies to suddenly move faster than elsewhere in Europe. There’s a large chance that will only shift production abroad, without reducing CO2 emissions on an international scale,” he said.

    Tata Steel’s Netherlands CEO, Henrar, concurred.
    “A national tax, on top of the ETS, could kill our business, without helping the climate in any way,” he said. “This is a cut-throat business – if our prices rise too much, demand will move elsewhere.”…

    Leo Meyer, a Dutch former project leader for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, told Reuters a carbon tax was essential. But he said the Netherlands, like many other nations, would still struggle to meet its goals under the Paris deal, meant to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in 2050…

    Recent climate models predict global warming will top 2 degrees by 2050 which could translate to a rise of around 3 degrees in the Netherlands, according to Meyer.
    The rapid rise of sea levels caused by such warming could one day pose a major threat for the country, which already has over a quarter of its land below sea level, he warned.
    “There is a real risk the country ultimately disappears under the sea, and our grandchildren’s grandchildren become climate refugees.”
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-netherlands-insight/going-dutch-on-clean-energy-polluters-push-for-state-to-split-the-bill-idUSKCN1S20F0

    30

  • #
    pat

    what a creep Graham is:

    26 Apr: The Hill: Graham jokes: If you said ‘Mueller thinks climate change is a hoax,’ then Trump would believe in it
    By Rebecca Beitsch
    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told those gathered at a Dallas-based sustainability conference that President Trump has a long way to go in acknowledging the science behind climate change.
    “Climate change is real, the science is sound and the solutions are available,” Graham said, adding jokingly, “If I told Trump that [special counsel Robert] Mueller thinks climate change is a hoax, we’d be well on our way.”…
    Graham was speaking on a panel at the EarthX2019 conference with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I) and Energy Secretary Rick Perry

    For his part, Perry mirrored some of Trump’s vocal skepticism about renewable energy sources, according to reporting from the Dallas Business Journal.
    “Some people just want to rely on them solely,” he said. “Our air might be cleaner, but the energy supply isn’t nearly as reliable. Imagine what a single natural disaster or cybersecurity attack would do to us when the sun doesn’t come out, or the wind doesn’t blow. The cost to our economy would be huge.”…
    https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/440822-graham-jokes-if-you-said-Mueller-thinks-climate-change
    26 Apr: Heartland blog: Chicago’s 100% Renewable is Pipe Dream and Disaster in the Making
    by Nancy Thorner
    Legislation unanimously passed on April 10, 2019 by the Chicago City Council has just made Chicago the largest city in the United States to commit to 100 percent clean energy. By so doing, Chicago, a metropolis of 2.7 million, has planned to enabe the metropolis to power its buildings on clean and renewable energy by 2035. Even the Chicago Transit Authority, the country’s second-largest public transportation system, will completely electrify its fleet of over 1,850 buses by 2040…

    The state (Illinois) currently gets about 8 percent of its energy from renewable energy resources, and existing law calls for reaching 25 percent renewables by 2025. Meeting 45 percent of the state’s electricity needs with renewables by 2030, as the new legislation stipulates, would require deploying an estimated 24,000 megawatts of new solar and wind.
    Illinois is about to learn what it takes to manage a nearly 20-fold increase in solar power. Illinois ranks 35th in the country in solar power right now, with 98 megawatts, less than 1 percent of its electricity generation. For a state starting with very little solar power now (less than 100 megawatts) and becoming a Midwest solar leader will mean building an industry infrastructure almost from scratch, and doing it at a fast pace, although by the end of this year it is estimated that Illinois will have almost 3,000 MW of solar power. As for wind power, Illinois ranks 6th in the nation with 4,464 installed capacity (MW)…
    http://blog.heartland.org/2019/04/chicagos-100-renewable-is-pipe-dream-and-disaster-in-the-making/

    note: writer Jarrett below thinks Australia is building HELE coal plants:

    26 Apr: Journal Standard: My View: Clean energy plan would test limits of Illinois power grid
    By Terry Jarrett
    (Terry M. Jarrett of Jefferson City, Mo., is an energy attorney and consultant who has served on both the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Missouri Public Service Commission)
    If Illinois signs on to a renewable energy future, though, it will likely have to survive on just wind turbines and solar panels. But could such a system meet all of the state’s baseload power needs? And, could it still deliver electricity at a reasonable price?

    The price issue is particularly relevant. Residential electricity in Illinois currently costs 12.30 cents per kilowatt-hour, just below the national average of 12.47 cents. But a country like Germany, which has already spent more than a decade pursuing a similar green agenda — and achieved only 29 percent wind and solar power generation — has seen its electricity costs climb to roughly 30 cents per kilowatt-hour, among the highest in Europe…

    Wind and solar perennially require back-up systems for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine. According to the Department of Energy, the most advanced wind turbines reach their full capacity only 42.5 percent of the time. And the highest-performing solar panels — ones in the southwestern U.S. that feature sun-tracking motors — reach their full capacity an even lower 30 percent of the time. Such intermittency issues explain why Germany must still keep coal plants cycling — to supply added power when needed.

    Extended weather disturbances can also drastically reduce the output of renewables. During January’s polar vortex, utilities were forced to shut down wind turbines in the face of bitter cold that can freeze gears and shatter turbine blades. Bloomberg News reported that utilities providing electricity to the Chicago area were forced to meet escalating power demands by ramping up existing coal and natural gas plants…

    Illinois’ Clean Energy bill also would vastly increase the number of electric vehicles on the road — forcing a major increase in statewide electricity demand. And then there’s the land clearance and construction needed for an estimated 40 million solar panels and 2,500 wind turbines, plus new infrastructure and power lines to deliver electricity from rural areas…
    https://www.journalstandard.com/opinion/20190426/my-view-clean-energy-plan-would-test-limits-of-illinois-power-grid

    40

    • #
      pat

      26 Apr: Weather Channel: What Spring? Winter Storm Xyler Expected to Spread Snow to the Great Lakes, Colder Temperatures
      by Linda Lam
      It may be late April, but Winter Storm Xyler will make you forget that it is spring in the Midwest this weekend. Snow, yes, that white stuff that we’d all rather forget about this time of the year, is on the way from Minnesota to New York. Cooler temperatures are also on the way from the northern Rockies into the northern Plains and Great Lakes as a pattern change will usher in another round of below-average temperatures.
      Snow is already beginning to fall in the northern Rockies. Rain will change over to snow across the northern Plains overnight…

      Winter storm watches and warnings have been posted by the National Weather Service for parts of southeastern Minnesota, northern Iowa, southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. A band of heavy snow will likely lead to difficult travel conditions, especially in the winter storm warning area…

      Temperatures near freezing, combined with a rather energetic Winter Storm Xyler could produce a stripe of snow from Montana to the Great Lakes. However, the timing and placement of the heavier snow remains somewhat uncertain.
      A mix of rain and snow is expected to develop Friday night in portions of the Dakotas, then in parts of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan Saturday into early Sunday…

      Portions of northeastern Iowa, deep southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois could see as much as 8-10 inches of snow. The exact location of this heaviest snow is difficult to nail down at this point.
      This could be one of the heaviest snowfall so late in the season for some locations. This includes Milwaukee where it could be the most snow after April 27 since 1990 and Grand Rapids could see the biggest snowfall so late in the season since 1963.
      Some snowfall accumulation also is likely in upstate New York and northern Pennsylvania…

      A second disturbance may bring a second chance for some snow Saturday night into Monday from Montana across the northern tier of states into North Dakota, northern Minnesota, northern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

      The northern Rockies could see more significant accumulations, with snow possibly persisting there through at least the middle of next week from a third round of snow late Monday into Wednesday or Thursday that could also spread into parts of the High Plains.

      Chilly Forecast
      By Saturday, colder-than-average temperatures are anticipated from parts of the Northwest into the northern Plains, Midwest and into parts of the Northeast.

      Low temperatures this weekend into early next week will drop back into the 20s and 30s for these areas, although 40s will return Tuesday to the southern Great Lakes. A few daily record lows are even possible, including Madison, Wisconsin, and Dubuque, Iowa, on Sunday…
      Highs temperatures will also be 5 to 20 degrees colder than average this weekend into next week.
      This translates to temperatures only reaching the 30s and 40s in the coldest spots from the northern Rockies into the Great Lakes region.
      The chilly conditions could last into early May. The latest 6- to 10-day outlook from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center highlights an area from the northern Rockies into the northern Plains and parts of Minnesota as having a 50 percent or better chance of below-average temperatures.
      https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/2019-04-26-winter-storm-xyler-forecast-midwest-great-lakes-northeast

      40

      • #
        pat

        26 Apr: Tasmania Examiner: Northern roads impacted by snow, with more weather to come
        by Matt Dennien
        An early dose of winter weather has caused disruptive conditions in the state’s North, with one road closed to some traffic and bushwalkers urged to take care.
        Cradle Mountain and Belvoir roads were closed to all traffic except four-wheel-drives between the Cethana Road intersection at Moina and the Murchison Highway on Friday night, Tasmania Police advised…

        The bureau issued another alert late Friday, warning bushwalkers in the state’s West and Central Plateau to expect strong southwesterly winds, cold temperatures and snow as low as 800 metres during the night.
        With the cold weather, strong winds and showers expected to affect parts of the Midlands, East-Coast, Upper Derwent Valley and South-East into Saturday, sheep graziers were also warned of a risk to herds…
        In Liawenee, the temperature fell to minus 1.2 degrees at 9pm Friday.

        Snow was seen across the state on Friday, from Mount Field to Miena and Cradle Mountain Road, with many sharing the sight on social media.
        https://www.examiner.com.au/story/6092691/northern-roads-impacted-by-snow-with-more-weather-to-come/

        26 Apr: SanFranciscoChronicle: Snow delays openings for Sierra camps, trails and roads
        by Tom Stienstra
        Projections estimate, for instance, that Glacier Point Road in Yosemite National Park will be open by Memorial Day weekend and that Tioga Pass/Highway 120 is likely to open in time for Fourth of July weekend. At the same time, campgrounds near Tuolumne Meadows in Yosemite are not likely to open until late July, even early August, and the season for the High Sierra Camps is at risk from such a small window of time available in a big snow year…

        For highway passes and best-known trailheads and campgrounds in the High Sierra, here are the current snow depths and projected opening dates…ETC ETC

        Lassen Park Highway
        The snow sensor at the staging area for Lassen Peak, 8,250 feet, reported 237 inches of snow, that is, just under a 20-foot base depth. In 2017, with a similar depth of 243 inches for April, the park opened the Lassen Park Highway on July 26…
        https://www.sfchronicle.com/travel/article/Snow-delays-openings-for-Sierra-camps-trails-and-13798303.php

        26 Apr: SkyMetWeather: Unusual Spring snow lashes Spain, Paris all set to see rains in the weekend
        Granada has already seen some snowfall, and yellow warnings are in place for some parts of Spain until the weekend while the rest will see relief from the prevailing weather conditions…
        The weather will remain cool, unsettled and breezy with more spells of weather fronts moving off the Atlantic in the days to come.
        Therefore, London will continue to witness unsettled weather and may settle down to just about 12 degrees Celsius by the weekend…

        50

        • #
          pat

          26 Apr: WGN TV: Late season, historic snow takes aim at Chicago
          by Bill Snyder & Tom Skilling
          A historic late-season snow on the way.
          A Winter Storm Warning has been issued for McHenry and Lake counties from 1 p.m. to 11 p.m. Saturday. Up to 8 inches are possible in these areas. Several other Chicago-area counties are under a Winter Storm Watch beginning Saturday afternoon.
          Northern counties of the Chicago area — Lake, McHenry, Boone and Winnebago — and a wider swath of southern Wisconsin are at greatest risk for a significant late-season snow…

          The Chicago area will effectively be bisected if not divided into thirds, with the northern third to half of the area at greatest risk for the most snow…
          All indications suggest that the heaviest late-season snow on the books here since snow records began in 1884-85 is possible by the time the final flakes of snow fall late Saturday night and early Sunday morning. The heaviest snow to fall this late in the spring is 2.2 inches back on May 1-2, 1940 — 79 years ago…
          https://wgntv.com/2019/04/26/winter-storm-watch-issued-for-saturday/

          40

          • #
            pat

            ***temperature(s) can begin to decline***

            what if the CAGW mob know temps are beginning to decline already?

            26 Apr: ClimateDepot: Marc Morano: Climate movement grandpa James Hansen says the Green New Deal is ‘nonsense’
            LINK Grist
            (excerpts) In April 20 debate with Sunrise Movement’s Varshini Prakash and Christian Aid’s Amanda Mukwashi, Hansen called the Green New Deal “nonsense.”
            Hosted by Al Jazeera, the 12-minute debate highlights a growing fault line between two theories of climate action. Among progressives and environmental justice advocates, the Green New Deal represents a last-ditch, economy-wide overhaul. Hansen, on the other hand, seems to argue for a more economically incremental approach that is centered on a carbon tax…

            Although Hansen is a proponent of using technology to bring down emissions, a carbon tax, he said, “is the underlying policy required. People need energy, we need to make the price of fossil fuels include their cost to society.”…
            “We should be phasing down emissions now,” he said, which seems like a bit of an understatement considering he’s been advocating for decreased emissions for the last, oh, four decades. “If we do that, we will get a little bit warmer than we are now, and then ***temperature(s) can begin to decline***,” he said, adding that we will have to phase out fossil fuels over the “next several decades” in order to accomplish this goal.
            https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/04/26/climate-movement-grandpa-james-hansen-says-the-green-new-deal-is-nonsense/

            30

  • #
    pat

    26 Apr: BBC: Cyclone Kenneth: Flooding feared as heavy rains hit Mozambique
    Cyclone Kenneth struck with winds of 220km/h (140mph) barely a month after a previous cyclone killed hundreds and devastated large areas…
    UN weather experts say it is unprecedented for two cyclones of such intensity to hit Mozambique in the same season.
    The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) also said that no previous records show a cyclone striking the region as far north as Kenneth.
    It said a fact-finding mission would examine the “impact of climate change and sea-level rise on Mozambique’s resilience” to extreme weather…

    27 Apr: ABC AM: Warnings of humanitarian disaster in Mozambique as second cyclone hits
    By David Sparkes
    Climate experts say this is climate change in action, and aid agencies warn the real killer will be flooding over the next week or so.
    Clare Nullis, World Meteorological Organization….
    Daniel Timme, UNICEF
    Arbie Baguios, Save the Children

    Updated 27 Apr: Bloomberg: Ocean Changes Affected Deadly Duo of Mozambique Cyclones
    THE ASSOCIATED PRESS (FRANK JORDANS)
    Warming waters and rising sea levels are affecting Indian Ocean cyclones such as those that have wrought havoc in Mozambique in recent weeks, making them potentially more deadly.
    But experts caution it is premature to say whether the unprecedented double-whammy of storms to hit the southern African nation is a consequence of climate change, and whether these cyclones will become more common…

    “There is no record of two storms of such intensity striking Mozambique in the same season,” said Clare Nullis, a spokeswoman for the World Meteorological Organization.
    “It is difficult to pronounce on one event like Idai, or even two like Idai and Kenneth. The statistical size of the sample is just too small,” she said. “But one thing is sure: The vulnerability of coastal areas will become worse with the sea-level rise induced by global warming.”…

    The World Meteorological Organization said this year’s cyclone season in the southwest Indian Ocean has been exceptionally intense, with 15 storms including nine intense cyclones. It is now tied with the record season of 1993-1994…

    Long and narrow with a 2,400-kilometer (1,500-mile) Indian Ocean coastline, the country is one of the world’s most vulnerable to global warming.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-26/ocean-changes-affected-deadly-duo-of-mozambique-cyclones

    30

  • #
    pat

    strange for 2GB. overnite, Mike Williams (in Michael McLaren slot) apparently had extremely lengthy interview with Beyhad Jafari of the Electric Vehicle Council of Australia, according to a friend.
    could not find it on today’s page, but this is precisely the same interview being aired on 13 Apr 2019, which I’m told is exactly the same interview.
    it is a softer interview than anything on ABC.

    Williams mentions possibility of all-electric Bathurst race; apparently he claimed that was a joke, when a caller phoned in & brought it up. I’ve been told the interview went out in the last hour or so of the program this morning, and there were only a couple of opportunities for listeners to call in.

    Jafari claims every other country is moving into EVs. claims someone or other said there’s no political argument in the rest of the developed world. it’s not a political fight elsewhere in the world; left and right all agree they are a good thing.

    AUDIO: 19min13sec: 13 Apr: 2GB: Mike Williams: Interview with BEHYAD JAFARI
    Mike Williams speaks with CEO of electric vehicle counsel of Australia Behyad Jafari.
    https://www.2gb.com/podcast/behyad-jafari/

    20

    • #
      yarpos

      Well we should let the rest of the world demonstrate they are a “good thing” then. Is there a prize for being first or something? We have probably done our bit in regard to being crash test dummies, especially the good folk of SA.

      60

    • #
      Graeme#4

      If they have a Bathurst EV race, what will they call it? The Bathurst 200?

      20

  • #
    pattoh

    “ABC starts promo to prop it up”

    Now that I can get ABC TV, I occasionally flick past/through tHer duM [the Drum].

    On average, I can usually last between 30 secs & a minute.

    It is too much like pissing contest between Old Boilers/Malcolm’s Cheerleaders going “Full Mrs Bucket” to see who has the most indignant Green Feminist Credentials & who has suffered the most head trauma butting the “Glass Ceiling”. [+/- botox therapy*]

    However recently, I have decided to gauge tHer duM’s potential as comedic platform for a drinking game.

    If you were to set gargle stations at every mention of:-

    1. Climate Change
    2. Renewable Energy
    3. Snowy 2.0 / Big Battery
    4. Electric Cars
    5. Religious Tolerance
    6. Gender Equity
    7. Adani
    8. derdy Coal
    9. the Great Barrier Reef
    10. *Nazi*.*
    11. *Donald Trump*.*

    with double points + shots for

    A. any references from a panelist with Pink Hair or facial piercings
    B. Frazer Anning
    C. GetUp
    D. Vegans
    E. Brave Iconic ………………
    F. ANYBODY ARGUING FROM “ERUDITE” COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
    G. Gender Pay in-equality

    With enough beer, even an old bushy could get through a whole episode.

    Truth is anybody would be better off walking the dog & waking up sober & sane than suffering the toxic propaganda & weaponized memes that Aunty [ tho old Witch] peddles as journalism these days.

    * tax deductible for professional presenters

    100

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      I decline to be infected
      By any of that dopey stuff.
      Rots the brains !

      31

      • #
        pattoh

        Bill

        The trouble is that compared to the crap that passes for entertainment e.g. “Reality TV” makes tHer duM look High Brow.

        The Spin Doctors who workshop program formats know that “Well Dressed & Highly Coiffured Strong Independent Women”[ +/- the Prius in the carpark] speak to a sense of entitled indignant self-righteousness.

        Google:-

        Edward Bernays + “Torches of Freedom”

        Emotion over rules reason until karma & reality bite .

        30

  • #
    pat

    Robyn Williams intro: kick off with a press confererence on climate at AAAS with a paper published in Science Advances, on the creeping costs of climate change blah blah…

    AUDIO: 7min16sec: 27 Apr: ABC The Science Show: Impacts of high-tide flooding on local economic activity
    Presenter: Robyn Williams
    The impacts of sea level rise have mostly been associated with extreme events such as tropical cyclones. Now the economic impacts caused by high-tide floods, also called nuisance or sunny-day floods have been measured in Annapolis Maryland. The impact was calculated based on data of visits to a car park which now floods at high tide. Current losses are 1.7%. As sea level rises, flooding increases, visits are reduced, and economic activity is expected to decline further.
    Guests:
    Christopher Field,Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford CA USA
    Samanthe Belanger, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford CA USA
    Katharine Mach, Department of Earth System Science, Stanford University, Stanford CA USA
    LINK: High-tide flooding disrupts local economic activity Science Advances 15 Feb 2019
    https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/impacts-on-high-tide-flooding-on-local-economic-activity/11049384

    20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    13 Apr: ABC The Science Show: Bill Shorten describes science under a Labor government
    Leader of the opposition Bill Shorten spoke at the Australian Academy of Science in November 2018. He described his party’s attitude to science and how science would form the basis of policy design. He pledged to repair the broken relationship between science and government.
    TRANSCRIPT:
    WILLIAMS: A while ago the leader of the opposition went to the Australian Academy of Science in Canberra and confronted a few hundred fellows and spelled out his commitments to R&D and the philosophies behind it. It was a long speech with hard promises, and this is what he said:

    (EXCERPTS) SHORTEN: When presented with the inarguable reality of rising emissions, when the United Nations gathers the world’s best scientists to tell us that we need to take urgent action on climate change, we have a national government in Australia who says don’t worry about that, we’re getting there in a canter. In fact, when Professor Brian Owler, the Sydney neurosurgeon, announced that he would be running as the Labor candidate in the Sydney electorate of Bennelong, one of the reasons he gave for his candidacy was his frustration with the way that science and scientists are disrespected by this government.
    Australian politics has got a range of problems right now. You don’t need to be a quantum physicist to tell you that. But one of the biggest issues in my opinion is that science and evidence and scientists are not sufficiently valued by sections of our politics and a part of our media. Our whole country pays a price for this…

    If I’m elected Prime Minister I want to set an ambitious national target for Australia. From both our private and our public sector collectively, I want to see us have 3% of our GDP devoted to research and development by 2030…

    If we are elected as a government, we affirm our fundamental respect for academic freedom. We will not seek to muzzle researchers, nor will we use our privileged position in the public pulpit to mock, to denigrate, to dismiss those researchers whose evidence we find inconvenient…

    Shock jocks and after dark cable television will not determine the academic or scientific direction of this nation…

    WILLIAMS: And we have invited the Minister Karen Andrews, herself an engineer, to present the coalition’s plans after Easter.
    https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/bill-shorten-describes-science-under-a-labor-government/10997434

    30

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      Who listens to Robyn Williams any more ? Years since I listened to him.
      He is an arrogant idiot
      Who stopped listening to anything UN-PcC
      Decades ago.

      52

      • #
        pat

        Bill in Oz -

        true, but am glad he’s pointed out Shorten said:

        “I want to see us have 3% of our GDP devoted to research and development by 2030″

        sounds like a helluva lot of money to me. academia would be happy!

        50

        • #
          Bill in Oz

          Bugger Shortstop !

          If will only be used to ‘train’ more climate phrenologists.

          In fact Robin Williams is a Climate Phrenologist !

          40

  • #
    doug Killeen

    the increase in Solar farms is remarkable but why are they being set up on good agricultural land when there is acres and acres of roof space on public and private building everywhere very close to the grid?

    40

    • #
      yarpos

      easier to construct (sites, council enthusiasm, permits)

      easier to make contracts and project manage one large site than a myriad of roof spaces

      if “firming” is real , it would be far more manageable and doable with one large site

      hosting solar panels is easier that farming hot dry country

      up until recently the impact of grid proximity didnt seem to be a thing, almost like it was a surprise to them.

      50

    • #

      Doug, we have about a 90% excess of good agricultural land at present. Farmers currently feed Australia x 4 with their hands tied behind their back. Imagine if food and fibre production was a actually priority, how much we could produce? Also, Irrigated Agriculture produces 50% of production by value, from 1% of the farmed land area, and a little over 1% of the rainfall runoff collected in dams. Double irrigation area with some already planned dams, and you double production. In Africa when you have a 2 year drought in major farming areas, starvation hits hard, millions die. Same thing here now in eastern Australia, and all the supermarket shelves are still full. Thanks to Diesel and farmers.

      30

  • #
    Another Ian

    “The cacophony that defines climate change discourse has gone from a three out of ten to a seven out of ten to a fourteen out of ten. Every conceivable negative repercussion from climate change has been documented and megaphoned in the media, which has catalogued impending catastrophes ranging from rising sea levels to depressed dogs to increased satellite collisions. Correspondingly and incredibly, the most fingered culprit for climate change, the burning of fossil fuels, continues not just unabated but at in increasing pace.

    In other words, climate science hysteria is not just useless but starting to crack…

    (My bold)

    Link at

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2019/04/27/finally-peer-reviewed-climate-change-research-gets-to-the-heart-of-the-problem/

    30

  • #
    Destroyer D69

    From Quadrant today.Canada has ripped the scales from their eyes and ditched the rose coloured glasses. Will our politicians have the cohones to recognise the light at the end of the tunnel and venture forth into the light of climate truth?
    The Lessons of Alberta and Ontario

    27th April 2019 Comments (0)

    James Allan

    Despite the massive increase in political correctness in Australia since I arrived here in 2005 there is nevertheless no doubt that we lag far behind my native Canada in the PC stakes. Okay, maybe today’s Jacinda Ardern Kiwis give the Canucks a run for their money when it comes to ‘don’t say anything, true or otherwise, that might give any group lest they be offended’. But I suspect there’s still enough South Island, sheep-farming, blunt-speaking types still around – a type I spent many enjoyable days with during my eleven years in New Zealand – that Canada would prevail in the PC Olympics.

    It’s a little surprising, therefore, to observe what is happening in Canadian politics. Only some four years ago, when Justin Trudeau (trust fund son of the former lefty Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, who managed to dodge serving in WWII) became the left-wing prime minister, the country’s provinces were almost all governed by left-wing premiers and parties. (Note: In Canada the Liberal Party is, and always has been, on the left side of politics, in some ways to the left of our Labor Party.) Out of Canada’s population of 37 million, some 33 million-odd inhabitants then lived in provinces governed by lefties. Today, not much more than a thousand days on from the mainstream media’s rapturous hysteria which greeted the victory of virtue-signalling, PC-revelling Trudeau fils, the number of those living in provinces run by the Liberals is down to under two million. The biggest province by far, Ontario, fell to a populist incarnation of the Tory Party led by Doug Ford (brother of the drug-taking Toronto mayor, the late Rob Ford). The Ontario Liberal Party was decimated, not even winning enough seats to retain official party status. Quebec also rid itself of the Libs. Last week, Prince Edward Island, the tiniest Canadian province and fictional home of Lucy Maude Montgomery’s Anne of Green Gables, tossed out the Libs in favour of a minority Conservative-Green Party grouping.

    Perhaps most instructively, the voters in the wealthy oil-producing province of Alberta on April 16 threw out a left-wing provincial government for a right-wing alternative. Alberta’s voters, who still detest the Liberal Party because of Trudeau Sr’s time in office, had opted in 2015 for an even-more-left party called the New Democratic Party, a sort of union/green conglomerate. They got over the line in 2015 because the right side of Alberta politics fractured due to the provincial Conservative Party becoming ever more touchy-feely. Think of the Black Hand faction of our very own Liberal Party and you get the idea. The NDP premier, Rachel Notley, cosied up to Trudeau Jr and played along with his carbon tax obsessions. Meanwhile Trudeau Jr. did nothing to stop the anti-oil brigade from tying up in court every attempt to build pipelines to ship out the oil on which the province’s prosperity and future depend. By the time voters threw her out, even she had turned on Trudeau. Her ‘be nice to him and he may throw Alberta some scraps’ strategy had delivered the province absolutely nothing and the electorate knew as much. Hundreds of thousands of jobs had gone and voters were very angry. When I say that, bear in mind that the desire to separate from Canada is now highest in Alberta and its neighbouring province of Saskatchewan, with some surveys putting the number who would vote to secede in those two provinces as high as 57 per cent.

    Enter Jason Kenney. He had been a cabinet minister (Treasurer in fact) in the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. After the Trudeau Jr. onslaught, Kenny went back to his native Alberta and set about trying to re-unite the right side of politics. He did so by forging a new party that is considerably more conservative than the Conservatives, but a little to the left of one or two of its warring off-shoots. Kenney’s party calls itself the United Conservatives (UCP), with Kenney becoming its leader in a run-off against a candidate even more right-wing. But don’t be misled. Kenney is very solidly right of centre. In his the recent and massive victory over Notley and the lefties who cosied up to Trudeau, the UCP leader did not hold back. Along with Ontario’s Premier Ford he vowed to challenge the Trudeau carbon tax in court, accurately depicting it as a virtue-signalling waste of money that would accomplish nothing while impoverishing Albertans. He pledged to demand a better way to equalise payments across provinces (because the current set-up always sees Quebec win at the expense of Alberta and others, much as South Australia, the Northern Territory and, incredibly, the ACT win at the expense of Western Australia). He would get those stalled pipelines built or there would be serious consequences.

    What can we learn from Canada, world capital of virtue-signalling lefty-ism? Well, we can be assured that when right-of-centre political parties take clear positions, even when opposed by virtually all of the media class, the university class and the bureaucratic class, they can not only win but win big. Here’s a motto for politicians on the Right: just come right out and say it! Renewable energy targets are massively expensive and do absolutely nothing – zero, nada, nothing – to bring down the world’s rate of temperature increase, so tell the voters exactly that. Remind them how China is firing up a new coal-energy plant every few weeks, and say that loud and clear as well. Be loud in supporting the cheapest energy source available, as are Kenney and Ford. And be clearly and explicitly against the virtue-signalling mobs on the Left. Kenney basically (and with only marginal exaggeration) described Trudeau Jr. as a stupid man with no grasp of policy. Doug Ford has been no less pointedly blunt.

    Both these politicians have wholly and completely abandoned the strategy of moving as close to the lefties as you can, then tracking them a centimetre to their right however left they then move. If you hope to win elections from ‘the centre’, you are obliged to ignore the fact that such a positioning is relative and, unless you throw out the anchor, you will continue drifting ever further to port.

    No, Jason Kenney and Doug Ford have opted for what is clearly the Donald Trump approach: give voters a clear and unmistakeable choice while highlighting the chasm between the Right side and the Left side. In Ontario it was a landslide for the Right. In Alberta it was a landslide for the Right. At the moment, at the national level in Canada, Trust Fund Trudeau and his Libs are all of a sudden behind in the polls by around six points, with an election needed by October of this year.

    And here in Australia? Sure, Scott Morrison is a massive improvement on Mr Harbourside Mansion. But then you could throw a dart at a phonebook and any name you landed upon would be a massive improvement on Malcolm. That said, the Coalition remains committed to Paris; it is neck-deep in the rent-seeking renewables scam; it does nothing about free speech, Section 18C and the scandalous harassment that saw Peter Ridd driven from James Cook University. Compare the Coalition’s policy of sitting on its hands while that legal marathon played out with Doug Ford’s approach, which is to tie university funding, in Canada a provincial matter, to free speech on campus. Oh, and don’t forget the ABC, that nest of nepotism and cronyism which continues to go unreformed even as its green-left bias becomes ever more evident and appalling, especially at election time.

    Only the awfulness of Labor and Bill Shorten policy agenda gives Team Morrison any chance of winning. But at some point that won’t be enough. That point may well be reached on May 18. The Australian Liberal Party will have no one to blame but itself.
    Show your support
    Donate Now

    60

  • #

    If the true aim of the Australian Government was to save the world from the impacts of fossil fuels, then a big impact would be to stop producing fossil fuels. In particular, Australia in 2017 produced 8% of the world’s coal. More significantly it has 14% of the world’s proven reserves. (Source BP Energy Outlook 2018)
    Even then, this is still a token effort. I have looked at top 20 fossil-fuel producing countries by value, expressing
    1) Gross production of oil, gas and coal in millions of tonnes of oil equivalent
    https://manicbeancounter.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/top-20-ff-producers-by-mtoe-2.png
    2) Gross production of oil, gas and coal approx value, expressed as % of GDP.
    https://manicbeancounter.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/top-20-ff-producers-by-gdp-share.png

    By oil equivalent, 44% of fossil fuel production originates in the US, China and Russia. Environmentalists try to stop fossil fuels in the US and other Western countries, but hardly a peep about China and Russia.
    What I never come across is the implications of abandoning fossil fuels for countries where producing fossil fuels underpin their economies and are the major source of government revenue. Mostly it just seems that reducing CO2 emissions is a way of governments appearing virtuous, whilst in reality, imposing harmful policies on the masses.

    40

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Oil is NOT a fossil fuel, only coal is.

      30

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      To add the ‘agenda’ to rid the use of hydrocarbon based fuels is to try to destroy the modern industrial world and create a one world govt based in the UN and reduce the population to under 500 million world wide, esp getting rid of the third world. CO2 has NOTHING to do with it. Its a plan, provable!

      40

      • #

        A single world government will not be achieved, as most countries will not grant the power to enable that to happen. Russia, China, India, Saudi Arabia, along with most developing countries are examples. But climate alarmism does enable politicians in some countries to undermine liberal democracies in the name of saving the planet.

        60

  • #
    pat

    27 Apr: ABC: Anti-Adani protesters get a frosty welcome in Queensland coal mining town of Clermont
    By Jemima Burt
    The 400-strong group received a frosty welcome from pro-coal locals who waved “Start Adani” placards and heckled the protesters as they drove into town…
    In a counter-rally effort, some local businesses have closed their doors to protesters this weekend and have held pro-coal demonstrations of their own…READ ON
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-27/adani-carmichael-mine-greens-clermont-convoy-qld/11051390

    27 Apr: Brisbane Times: Anti-Adani convoy hits Queensland’s ‘coal country’
    By Lucy Stone
    Mr Brown said while driving through the Galilee Basin on Saturday morning he had been struck by the natural beauty of the plains, with great mountains jutting out across flat lands and rolling downs.
    “I’m pretty well travelled in this country and I didn’t know,” he said.
    “I said to my local driver ‘where are all the pictures?’ And he said ‘no, it’s coal country’
    “No, it’s not – it’s spectacular. It’s just waiting for tourists and hospitality, which is going to be part of its wealth in the future.”

    The veteran conservationist called for a transition from coal to renewable energy and tourism, to make the most of the sun, not the sun’s product from millions of years ago…
    https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/anti-adani-convoy-hits-queensland-s-coal-country-20190427-p51hsm.html

    30

  • #
    paul

    do the rubbery figures include the now cancelled 150 Mw solar plant in south australia that would have cost 650 million dollars . 650 mil for 150 Mw Oh my god .

    30

  • #
    Neo Sokrates

    Anthropogenic global warming is one of the biggest misconceptions of modern times. The belief that carbon dioxide is causing global warming is based on several big mistakes which many climate scientists are overseeing or denying.

    1. The greenhouse effect is based on a simplified misleading model which not is taking into account that the atmosphere has a gravitational temperature gradient which decreases with altitude.
    https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2017/05/mgh-not-greenhouse-gases-provides-warm.html https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2018/12/posts-evaluating-earth-energy-budget.html https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_energy_budget https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealized_greenhouse_model

    2. The sun has a much bigger effect on the climate than climate scientists want to admit. The sun with it’s activity can modulate cosmic rays and the cloud cover on earth which is in fact responsible for the global warming we have experienced during the last century.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CFFvJTXwW_w&list=PLL4Ne3bkwWloJ0BCAiftwm7jTwh8iahoV&index=16
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8AdAV3Va9Mg&list=PLL4Ne3bkwWloJ0BCAiftwm7jTwh8iahoV&index=17

    3. Carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas is claimed to have determined the temperature of the earth during the last ice ages. As evidence the ice cores from Vostok, Antarctica are brought forward. From these it can be seen that there is a very good correlation between temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide. It is overseen that carbon dioxide follows the variations of temperature and not the other way around.
    http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
    http://euanmearns.com/the-vostok-ice-core-and-the-14000-year-co2-time-lag/

    It is time that these errors will be recognized so that mankind not is wasting so much resources and actions on mitigating the use of cheap energy and the release of carbon dioxide which not is effecting our climate. It would be much better to use these resources for a better purpose.

    20