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

Australian government needs coal subsidies to save grid from renewables subsidies

In Australia, the subsidy bandaids are piling up.

Coal Plants, La Trobe, Yallorn, Victoria, Photo Jo Nova

We subsidized weather-controlling generators in the hope that our electrical infrastructure could not only provide electricity but would also stop storms, floods and The Taliban. However the weather-controlling-generators were also weather-dependent, and it was costing quite a lot to add storage, stability, transmission lines and synchronous condensors.   Who knew changing global weather would cost so much?

Once upon a time Australia had a full complete electricity grid that was cheap and efficient. Then we added inefficient things to it until we had two whole grids, one that changed the weather (in theory) and a spare one that filled in for all the other grids failures. For some reason it was not cheaper to run two whole grids rather than just one.

The subsidies were needed to drive out the cheapest player (coal power), but having succeeded, we then needed different subsidies to keep the coal power in.

What a tangled web we weave when first we lie to ourselves.

Grid and bear it: subsidised coal part of energy overhaul

Geoff Chambers, The Australian

Special payments will be needed to keep ageing coal-fired and gas power stations in business to avoid future spikes in electricity prices, under a national plan to shore up the energy grid.

A new capacity mechanism recommended by the Energy ­Security Board will put incentives in place to stop the early closure of power plants and create long-term signals for investment in dispatchable generation.

NSW is nearly running out of electricity every 4 days.

The Australian understands the Australian Energy Market Operator has issued a record number of warnings about a lack of supply in NSW this year, at a rate of almost one every four days. The notices are issued when AEMO considers there is not enough ­capacity available in the system.

Once upon a time Australians got “capacity” for free, now we have to pay for it.

We didn’t need an Energy Security Board either.

 

9.8 out of 10 based on 107 ratings

169 comments to Australian government needs coal subsidies to save grid from renewables subsidies

  • #
    TdeF

    What is it costing this country to get cheap energy and reduce world Carbon dioxide by 33%? And help third world nuclear countries like China, India and Russia?

    At least we are saving the world from carbon dioxide and the terrible heat, more frequent and more severe storms. It is a raging 5C at the moment in Melbourne and it needs to be 1.5C cooler, no more. Is that too much to ask? Think of the koalas. I blame the million imported Afghan camels roaming our country. Only camel burgers will save us. We need more taxes and higher electricity prices, if only to pay for all the people now managing our electricity.

    701

    • #
      John in Oz

      2 degrees overnight here in the Adelaide Hills, this just a few days prior to Spring when we are supposed to be warming up.

      191

      • #
        Analitik

        2 degrees this morning in suburban Melbourne, too. Of course the temperature recorded by the BoM will be 5 degrees due to the lack of wind coupled with the Urban Heat Island effect in the area around the weather monitoring station.

        251

        • #
          R.B.

          Its worse than blaming a heat island effect. I’m near the airport in Adelaide, in among roads and brick houses. They barely registered below zero for a short period in the grassed area at the AP, while cars more than a few metres from a house had iced over windscreens and roofs, nearby. One empty house and one well insulated house had frost on their roofs. If you weren’t walking your dog first thing in the morning or going to work early, you would think that the western suburbs were frost free last winter.

          20

      • #
        Klem

        2 degrees?..Luxury…

        20

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      And of course the beaurocrats love this rubbish. The more complicated the energy system becomes, then the more work for them.
      GeoffW

      190

  • #
    Wixy

    “In a landmark ruling and a win for a bushfire survivors group, the Land and Environment Court has ordered the New South Wales Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) to take steps to safeguard against climate change.” unquote.

    The EPA has 28 days to appeal.
    The Greens are now using friendly judges to get their agenda through. Who is in charge… Governments or unelected Judges?

    https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/bushfire-survivors-win-landmark-climate-change-case-against-nsw-epa/ar-AANLfRB?ocid=msedgntp

    511

    • #
      clarence.t

      I would love to see what the judge thinks the EPA should be doing.

      Even if CO2 was the cause of this mythical “climate change”, there is absolutely nothing the EPA could do about “climate” which would make even a gnat’s little toe difference on an elephant’s ar*e.

      531

      • #
        Ian

        “Even if CO2 was the cause of this mythical “climate change”, there is absolutely nothing the EPA could do about “climate” which would make even a gnat’s little toe difference on an elephant’s ar*e.

        I agree there is nothing the EPA could do to make any difference about climate. However it imay well be that the EPA will be spared having to do overmuch as investors may very well call the shots. Follow the money is still very valid.

        A New South Wales plan for Australia’s largest renewable energy zone in the state’s New England region has been overwhelmed with investor interest, with registrations coming in at more than four times the available capacity, the state government says.

        The New England renewable energy zone had received 80 registrations of interest from investors offering to build a total of 34GWs of new wind, solar and storage projects. The proposed 8GW-capacity zone is one of five designated clean energy areas in the state under legislation passed with multiparty support last year/

        The NSW scheme involves the government awarding long-term contracts for three different types of technology: wind and solar farm; long-duration storage that can provide back-up power for eight hours or more, which is likely to come from pumped hydro or batteries: and fast-start “firming” generation that ensures grid stability in a grid that increasingly runs on variable renewables, which is likely to come from batteries or gas.

        You may find the article an interesting read.

        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/27/clean-energy-interest-soars-in-nsw-as-states-resist-rules-to-prop-up-coal

        111

        • #
          clarence.t

          So, even more disruption to the grid.

          Dumb !

          160

        • #
          clarence.t

          “must not keep coal or gas generation in the system for any longer than was required to maintain electricity system reliability.”

          ie.. basically forever !

          100

        • #
          clarence.t

          ““A rapid, orderly transition to 100% renewable electricity is critical to Australia’s energy future, which is achievable in a sustainable, reliable and cost-effective way.””

          from idiocy, to the totally delusional !

          170

    • #
      Tel

      Does the court really have jurisdiction to create policy?

      220

      • #
        Tel

        I looked it up, and the Land & Environment Court has jurisdiction to rule for a bunch of specific acts, probably the only relevant one would be this.

        https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1997-065

        Rural Fires Act 1997 No 65

        That act says nothing about Climate Change as a hazard.

        400

        • #
          Strop

          Although the act doesn’t refer to Climate change. The agencies that can be directed by the court probably have in their act or governance requirements a responsibility reduce or manage hazards and dangers. It’s probably open to the court to interpret climate change as a factor.

          Given it’s acknowledged (even by those who say CO2 is responsible for climate change) that NSW doesn’t have sufficient CO2 emissions to cut that would make a difference; I guess the court will be ordering the NSW EPA to stop all of China’s, India’s, and USA’s emissions. Or to install enough CO2 capture to offset the world’s emissions. 😉

          Or, maybe, fuel reduction is a better hazard to tackle and the court will accept that as fulfilling the EPA’s responsibility due to it being the one thing any state can somewhat control.

          191

    • #
      Serge Wright

      Assuming AGW is real and dangerous (which we know is not the case), what does the court expect the EPA to do ?. We know that Australia’s tiny 1% of CO2 emissions is not a measurable component of the additional perceived climate / fire risk. Is the court expecting the EPA to threaten war on China unless they go to net-zero immediately ?. Or does “safeguard” against an offshore generated risk mean that the EPA should order the clearing all the bush to remove the perceived increased fire hazard. One thing is very certain and that is any increased measures to reduce our 1% faster and harder will make no difference, especially in a world where China alone plans to increase it’s emissions up to 2030 by many times our tiny amount and the rest of the developing world is full steam ahead with coal.

      191

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    About a year ago a simple calculation revealed that every Australian household was paying an extra $438 annually to support the AEMEO Executives, the highly dysfunctional and emblematic Renewables showcase and various benefit diversions to essential management teams.

    Oh sorry, they forgot about the main item, the provision of reliable, cheap electricity.

    Maybe next year.

    560

    • #
      PeterS

      May be never. PM Morrison has no intention of supporting coal fired power. He’s too busy trying to reduce our emissions and getting us vaccinated. In other words, smashing our economy and our freedoms.

      421

    • #
      Ronin

      “Oh sorry, they forgot about the main item, the provision of reliable, cheap electricity.”

      KK, Think cheap reliable electricity would be well down their list of priorities.

      100

    • #
      RickWill

      There are 10M Australian households. At $438/household, that makes $4.38bn in income. To me that is doubtful.

      Last time I looked, AEMO cost were rising at twice inflation. It would take a lot of inflation over the past few moths to get to $4.38bn. Audrey’s replacement must be REALLY well paid. Maybe he is handing out a lot of $12,000 watches to his staff for keeping the lights on.

      40

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        ?
        Could you clarify that.

        21

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          I keeping it short there were “drains” that weren’t described: for example both China and Germany would be getting a significant slice of that money through their provision of unreliable renewable windmills and solar processors. Then there’s the huge marketing sham that pits one group against the next in a false offer to get you the best price.

          All of these extras have been added by government sleight of hand in recent years as drains on a former basic service that was run at cost as a public service.

          71

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Greens sue Aussie gas company for greenwashing, “alleging the company’s statements about gas being ‘clean’ and having a clear pathway to net zero by 2040 were deceptive.”

    Australian environmental group sues Santos over clean energy claims

    https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/australian-environmental-group-sues-santos-over-clean-energy-claims-2021-08-26/

    We’re gonna need a bigger windmill.

    330

    • #
      clarence.t

      Time someone sued the wind and solar firms over their claims of clean energy.

      Over their lifetime, wind and solar are horrendously polluting to the environment.

      491

      • #
        Neville

        Clarence t, the TOXIC wind and solar mess become SUPER pollutants to the environment every 20 years when they are buried in landfill FOREVER.

        290

        • #
          PeterS

          We can solve the problem is we bury the alarmists along with the pollutants . After all they are the real pollutants to society and our economy.

          271

          • #
            OldOzzie

            I still like the solution of some Foresters in Victoria we met when sheltering from one of the Bushfires in Victoria during early 2000s whilst 4WD Driving in High Country

            They had had some Greenies padlock themselves to trees in an Area they were logging and refuse to unlock – One of the Foresters took the Volvo Front end loader, located a Very Large Bull Ants Nest, dug it up whole and then transported and dumped it next to the Greenies.

            Soon unlocked as they were being ravaged and threaten to sue the Foresters.

            The Foresters said – “You are Communing with Nature” and told them to P’Off”

            481

            • #
              PeterS

              Those Foresters should now do the same with the liars and scam artists residing in the parliaments of Canberra and all our capital cities because our politicians are doing far more damage to our economy and our society than all the Greenies put together.

              212

            • #
              Ronin

              LOL, love it, nature can be a two way street.

              100

            • #
              Chris

              I love practical solutions. I would like to see the next extinction rebellion artist , who has glued themselves to the road – be left there. The police could put traffic cones around them and keep the crowds back. I reckon 24 hours would just about fix the problem.

              100

              • #
                Analitik

                Larger vehicles should be allowed to drive right over the top of them so they can thoroughly inspect the prop and drive shafts and axles of the trucks and trailers that transport all the luxuries they eat/wear/consume including their superglue.

                60

              • #
                clarence.t

                Bomb them with chicken poop or cow poop filled balloons

                The “Stinkies” then earn their name.

                10

            • #
              Fuel Filter

              Yeah. These (can’t say the noun here, but starts with an “a” and ends with an “s”) have been doing that since forever here in the USA.

              Don’t you guys use the “Tree Huggers” Moniker? There’s a group here called “Earth First” that actually been deemed a “terrorist” movement by our .Guv. for decades now.

              30

          • #
            GlenM

            The old bumper sticker from the 1970s.” Fertilise the wilderness. Doze in a greenie”.

            60

            • #
              Ted1

              “Fertilise the wilderness”. A lot of that went on in the big bushfire season a couple of years ago. Some of the chemicals used for “bombing” bushfires are powerful fertilisers.

              I worried at the time for the Wollemi Pine, which was surely at least surrounded by fires. But my biggest fear was that the firefighters might seek to protect them by dousing them with fire retardants.

              A lot of vegetation depends heavily on the type of soil that it is growing in. You can often tell the soil types from a distance by the type of trees growing there. It is quite possible that those unique trees depend absolutely on the type of soil they are growing on. Fertiliser which makes a wheat crop grow could be deadly poison for them.

              10

      • #
        Robber

        An interesting idea Clarence – wonder how it could be initiated?

        20

    • #
      RickWill

      There is a legitimate case to claim “Renewable Energy” from random power generators is false advertising.

      The counter claim of course is that the energy is extracted from a sustainable source and in that sense is renewable. However the term RE is commonly applied to wind turbines and solar panels, which cannot extract the energy sustainably.

      30

  • #
    Plain Jane

    I have been having a panic about the moves of THEM to bring about a NWO and general dystopian future. The ability to do that would be assisted by modern technology like phones and smart grids etc etc. Then it occured to me that the agendas of the same THEM have always included Global Warming crapola, and the destruction of our power grid. Then it occured to me that perhaps this disease of NWO might be self limiting. There cant be all this lovely new technology, like mobile phones, and internet globally connected everything with nasty social credit control, if there is no electricity. I am sure the power grids of Aus will collapse soon, and I am not sure THEY can bring about NWO anywhere near as quickly as THEY are bringing about a lack of reliable electricity to power it. Take out Lidell, LoyYang and Bayswater and I think the grid of SE Australia would be a total basket case. Time to put diesel generators and a big diesel tank on the shopping list.

    350

    • #
      yarpos

      Yes anyone in a situation where it works should be getting their own generation capacity. Time to match words with action, I recall quite a few already have from previous discussions.

      No probs in the ACT of course, as they are 100% totally RE. Yay!

      130

      • #
        Ted1

        Don’t expect to be able to get fuel when the power goes out. Fuel will be the next thing rationed.

        The damage will be much bigger than anybody realises.

        00

    • #
      Bright Red

      “Time to put diesel generators and a big diesel tank on the shopping list.“
      Already done installed and working ready for this summer.
      Electricity along with transport will only be for the so called elites and I am sure they are working on ways to ban self generation so all of us minions share the misery.

      190

    • #
      mal

      Australia has only 20 days of fuel stored
      our fuel comes from Singapore refineries and China could blockade our sea lanes with no opposition
      No fuel, no functioning generators, same result

      130

      • #
        Chad

        The “20 days” is the stock level for all supply lines.
        There is nothing to stop anyone having a personal stock of several thousand litres.
        I used to do this when we had oil fired heating, with a 6000ltr storage tank.
        Tip..domestic fuel oil is basicly diesel less a few additives !…but costs a fraction of diesel !
        Also most diesels will run on a range of fuels…blended cooking oil being but one, and off course there are numerous veg oil sources grown in Au
        LPG conversion is also a possible option.

        50

        • #
          Robber

          fuel oil used to be known as light heating oil – really a mox of kero and diesel. But it may be cheaper because transport diesel has a large excise tax of 43 cents/litre included for onroad use – rebated if used on farms, mines etc.

          40

          • #
            Analitik

            I remember a petrol station that once showed the price with a “plus tax” on their sign. Motorist were outraged that 85% of the price was made up in taxes and the station was made to take the sign down.

            70

          • #
            Bright Red

            The fuel excise is also rebated on your tax return if used for domestic electricity generation.

            20

      • #
        Serp

        We could convert our ICE vehicles to run on gas generated from coal as was done during the war years; no, couldn’t happen with the health and environment legislation developed since then.

        50

        • #
          Chad

          Remember , we have an “ocean” of natural gas under us in Oz…..and an existing distribution system, filling pumps, together with all the tested and proven technology for transport.
          And ,..it has less emissions than petrol or diesel !
          We could also go with CNG using personal. “ at home” refil compressor systems so you can use your own domestic gas supply to run your car.

          50

      • #
        GlenM

        Just let them try!!! ..if its a fight you want!!!.. I dare them! Cue do nothing or run away and ignore it.

        00

      • #
        Tilba Tilba

        China could blockade our sea lanes with no opposition

        And we could that same day stop all coal, iron, gas, and whatever else4 we supply them with. We’re not helpless little muppets you know. We have some regional grunt.

        00

  • #
    Neville

    We live in a world of extremists and con merchants and they are gradually brainwashing more kids and the more delusional,feeble minded adults every year.
    Data supports the sensible sceptics but watch out if you have the nerve to use the real world data against the extremist’s fantasy world and fairy stories.
    Most govts around the world are true believers even though the data and evidence proves we are living in the best period for humans EVER and our planet has been greening for at least the last 30 years.
    So why do we persist in ignoring the data and how do we stop the con merchants and extremists from ruining our power grid even even further? Beats me.

    280

    • #
      yarpos

      Because in the first world we have met most of our basic needs and have too much time on our hands. The people more at that end of the spectrum then start to think of other ways to make themselves feel good, hence all the virtue signalling, save the planet, arent I the noble one stuff.

      260

      • #
        roman

        I call it socialised nagging.

        Previously, nagging was kept in the home but equality has brought women into the productive spaces – and made everyone a little less so.

        Except Jo of course, who is awesome.

        10

  • #
    clarence.t

    UK experiencing a totally normal year, climate-wise.

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image_thumb-133.png

    Where’s the warming ??

    201

  • #
    Neville

    Even the clueless California extremists are panicking and returning to GAS to save the collapse of their electricity grid.
    And after wasting 10s of billions $ Germany has become a basket case and they are still relying on Coal plus Russian GAS to save their backsides every year.
    Unbelievable but true and yet none of this is difficult to understand.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/welcome-to-the-green-blackout-state-california-to-build-5-gas-power-plants-to-avoid-blackouts/

    180

  • #
    PeterS

    Why stop at coal? We also should subsidise nuclear power too. We need the technology and we also need the fuel for nukes to defend ourselves in case the US folds. We either grow up or shut down. There is no middle ground in all this in the long term.

    210

    • #

      The enrichment level for nuclear power plants is typically between 3% and 5%, and more often than not, closer to that 3% mark.

      The enrichment for nuclear ‘weapons grade’ is higher than 90%.

      The two enrichment processes are totally different.

      Incidentally, with respect to enrichment for power plants, the pellets inside the rods, with the rods then inside the assemblies, will see them lasting up to 18 Months. At the end of their use, they are back down to around 0.6% to 1.2% enrichment. The existing Uranium Ore in the ground is already at an enrichment level of 0.7%, so some of the pellets are less enriched than the ‘dirt’ containing the Uranium still in the ground.

      Tony.

      220

      • #
        Lance

        Military reactors for submarines and aircraft carriers actually use “weapons grade” uranium fuels.

        Civilian reactors us the uranium fuel cycle because the reactor designs were adapted from the “approved” military designs.

        The overall fuel cycle for the fast breeder reactors was implemented to produce both uranium and plutonium, one for fuel and the other for weapons.

        The critical issue for the uranium fuel cycle is fuel rod reprocessing. Uranium and Plutonium are separated, purified, and sent on to their respective uses. US President Carter placed a “moratorium” on reprocessing fuel rods to “prevent the possibility of proliferation”. This is what caused the nuclear high level waste storage problem: If you can’t reprocess it, you must store it”.

        A Thorium cycle largely avoids the transuranic series in its entirety and provides a way of consuming high level wastes as trigger rods in a seed & bed design.

        It is a political, resource, reprocessing, proliferation, design, operational and educational issue. Mostly political.

        Thorium is far more abundant than Uranium. Long term, it is the more practical fuel.

        90

      • #
        Hanrahan

        AND that “dirt” is close to the surface, can be detected with a meter. There must be a dozen old mines in hard rock where spent rods can be buried deep.

        Sth Africa has mines so deep they are incredibly expensive to aircondition and Germany has old salt mines which are, by definition, geologically stable. Make an offer and they can be yours.

        50

        • #
          RobB

          But the old South African ones fill up with water, which brings all sorts of heavy metals to the surface… problem forever. Gotta get your geology right.

          10

          • #
            Hanrahan

            If the gold miners can pump the water why can’t the company charging millions for disposal?

            As you fill a level you backfill anyway.

            10

  • #
    Graham Richards

    There’s an old saying that applies to the current government regarding many things but mostly it applies to energy & climate change “ they can’t see the wood for the trees”.
    Perfect fit!!🙈🙈🙈

    70

    • #
      PeterS

      I don’t think they can see either the wood or the trees. After all they have a scorched earth agenda.

      180

  • #
    Robber

    The AEMO grid has now reached a situation around midday where solar and wind make up over 50% of generation, often resulting in negative spot prices. Coal generators are forced to cut back to under 10,000 MW yet must quickly ramp up to 17,000 MW to meet the evening peak demand. Gas and hydro must also ramp up to meet peak demands.
    New wind and solar should not be added to the grid unless they also invest in adequate storage – that will reveal the true costs of “cheap renewables”.
    Average wholesale prices in Victoria have declined over the last three years from $110 to $74 to $46/MWhr reflecting the increasing surplus capacity, but then no one makes money without subsidies. “Ruinables” are still selling energy certificates for $30-40/MWhr over and above the wholesale price, with Victorian certificates rising to $70.

    211

    • #
      PeterS

      Does this mean all that excess coal fired power goes to waste? How about they use it to charge grid scale batteries? See how nonsensical all this is? This nation has gone mad.

      172

      • #

        There is no excess coal fired power, and it does not go to waste.

        Coal fired power ramps up and down on a daily basis by anything up to 4,500MW from low to high.

        It follows the Load exactly, (contrary to popular belief) and it provides the Base upon which all other power is added to make up to the actual power being consumed at that point in time.

        The actual Load Curve for power consumption is basically the same, day in day out, (only changing slightly on a Seasonal basis) so they know exactly how much power is required at any point in time.

        Coal fired power is used to charge any of the batteries, and here, keep in mind that is such a tiny amount.

        Coal fired power is also used to run the Pumps that (when required) move the water back up the hill to the upper holding water storage for pumped hydro.

        Tony.

        241

        • #
          Analitik

          It did but the addition of generators that can add and stop supply according to the whims of the weather means that the coal stations are faced with peaks and troughs they cannot respond to.

          These days, the coal stations can ramp up and down to the averaged demand but the peaks and troughs need to be catered for by fast responding dispatchable generators (basically open gas turbines and hydro) else the grids would quickly collapse as all the coal plants were tripped by the frequency fluctations.

          41

        • #
          Tel

          Tony, the output power follows the load, but these plants have huge firebox and boilers that simply cannot ramp up and down quickly. In order to provide qualified “Spinning Reserve” the plant must be able to respond in 10 minutes, and the only way to achieve that is to maintain the fire and boiler at a few percent higher than necessary fuel and water consumption. The unused steam simply gets vented to the atmosphere.

          Thus, if other unreliable generators on the grid might drop power within that 10 minutes, in order to maintain grid stability you need sufficient “Spinning Reserve” to cover that, and inevitably someone needs to pay for the difference. The AEMO docs admit they do not have a market in “Spinning Reserve” but they do pay money on contract, although the totals are not easy to check on a day to day basis.

          https://www.aemo.com.au/energy-systems/electricity/wholesale-electricity-market-wem/system-operations/ancillary-services

          Note that they count dispatchable loads and interruptible loads as if it were generation capacity … which is not really reserve, but it serves a similar purpose.

          It’s not at all unreasonable to pay a premium for a service where additional capacity is available at short notice. You pay more for taxi fare than you do for a bus because the bus does a regular route every half hour, while the taxi comes when you ask for it. Putting that in terms of power generation, if the coal plants were given a smooth ramp-up and ramp-down schedule in advance and they knew exactly what power they needed to deliver then they could do it very efficiently … but when they are put upon to stabilize the grid at short notice, they run at lower efficiency, which costs more and requires them to charge more.

          20

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN here’s the REAL WORLD DATA from Willis Eschenbach and Dr John Christy. Yet the UN and so many so called scientists and most of the World’s govts seem to ignore this data and prefer to rely on con tricks and fairy stories.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/wheres-the-emergency/ from Willis.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/putting-climate-change-claims-to-the-test/ from Dr Christy.

    111

  • #
    Simon

    Coal is the most expensive means of power generation because you have to pay for the fuel. The cheapest suppliers are renewables because the marginal cost is almost zero.

    271

    • #
      PeterS

      That is a lie and you know it.

      501

    • #
      clarence.t

      More totally fasle garbage from the simple one.

      Great to see the simpering one advocating for the removal of wind and solar subsidies, since supply from them is so cheap. 😉

      Guess what, without those subsidies, wind and solar would be nothing but a tiny niche market, not even connected to the grid.

      431

    • #
      WXcycles

      T R O L L

      241

    • #
      RobK

      RE produces either energy gluts or famines at high costs. When it produces most of its energy, no one wants it. It is worse than worthless. It doesn’t produce reliably when there is demand. Marginal cost is irrelevant if you have nothing to sell.
      A child can work this out unless handouts have turned it into a spoilt brat.

      261

    • #

      If that’s true Simon, why are India and China installing hundreds of coal fired power stations while the West is decarbonising its power sources. Why aren’t they going down the cheap renewable energy path? Who is dumb? Them or us?
      Maybe they’ve worked out they don’t have enough land area (or continental shelf area) for lower density solar and wind energy sources to raise their capacity to 4 times current levels (China) and 14 times current levels (India) to achieve parity with the West. Australia should wait to see how another developed world economy achieves 100% renewables before going down the same route. The famous adage of the social sciences applies here: people only change their most cherished beliefs when those beliefs start to bite them, but they have to bite really hard (Gregory Bateson in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, wonderful book).

      191

    • #
      Bright Red

      Why should a power generator in Aus pay anything for coal as it is just sitting there in the ground free for the taking. It’s the state government’s that charge for the coal forcing up the price of electricity. There is a cost of harvesting both coal and wind/solar and turning it into electricity. There is also the cost of making it dispatchable. In this regard coal is way cheaper than the unreliables that don’t have any grid scale dispatch ability so fall back on coal and gas and diesel while not paying their share for this backup.
      Bottom line is that if it wasn’t for meddling state governments coal and gas would be free to harvest.
      But in any case you can look at it this way. Royalties paid to the state governments is the people’s money and effectively goes back into their pockets as lower taxes. So local coal used for local electricity generation is actually free for the taking.

      151

    • #
      Hanrahan

      The coal is free. We don’t have to write a cheque to The Maker when we mine it. States tax it unfairly and it requires labour and machinery to get it to a usable form, same with wind and solar.

      151

      • #
        R.B.

        Coal is free like renewable sources, it just costs money to make use of it, like renewable sources. Fossil fuel users pay royalties. Renewable energy users hoover that up as subsidies

        should be the boilerplate reply.

        00

    • #
      Neville

      Thanks to simple Simon we now know that the TOXIC S&W disasters require ZERO subsidies, because SUNSHINE and WIND are FREE.
      Thanks again simple S.

      201

    • #
      Ronin

      I can’t believe people still believe that and make an idiot of themselves when they spout it.

      171

    • #
      el gordo

      Regardless of cost, coal fired power is the most efficient and cheapest form of energy over the long term.

      132

    • #
      Terry

      Also, fish is the cheapest meat because it is free from the sea; not like beef, chicken, pork, and lamb, which must be farmed.

      Evidence for this is the $0 Market Price you pay whenever you order ‘Fish of the Day’… (back when we were allowed to have restaurants and businesses and freedoms and…)

      /sarc (just in case it’s needed. You can never be too careful these days…)

      111

    • #
      Strop

      I agree with Simon. Given that there are parts of the day when wind and solar don’t produce any electricity, and therefore you’re not paying for electricity because you’re not using any when there isn’t any, then zero is the cheapest.

      As opposed to that pesky reliable coal electricity produced 24 hrs each day. So reliable that my cost is never zero with things like my wifi modem on all the time, TV and DVD/foxtel box and oven on standby, hot water service heating all night when the sun isn’t shining. Darn this coal power that has me buying electricity 24hrs a day.

      Reliability is clearly some clever marketing ploy to ensure I buy electricity all the time and therefore spend more. I totally see where Simon is coming from and I’ll be voting Greens at the next election so I won’t have any electricity expenses for large parts of the day.

      120

    • #
      Analitik

      The cheapest suppliers are renewables because the marginal cost is almost zero.

      That’s right up there with “The science is settled” for unscientific statements.

      130

    • #
      Dean

      Nope, because all those thingamajigs for converting the wind and sun (which I do agree ARE free) into useable energy sources costs an absolute bomb.

      And coal IS the battery and thus the “battery” is thrown in there for free. Unlike the batteries needed for renewables which costs multiples of the generation systems, and looses 25 to 30% of the energy stored.

      But +1 for throwing “marginal” in there in a vain attempt to gain some street cred!

      100

    • #

      You see how cheap renewables are have a look at the bills people have to pay for electricity.
      Proof for zero marginal coasts is where, Simple Simon ?
      You haven’t, it’s a lie.

      70

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    The problem is that many Gloom Goblins believe that things are desperate, and that we must eliminate CO2 emissions. That this is impossible because two thirds (of man-made) comes from countries who have no intention of cutting emissions and their economies. Further these Gloom Goblins believe that batteries and hydrogen will be the solution if only we believe. That they cannot do simple arithmetic on the cost of the necessary batteries is merely a sign of how stupid and deluded they are, or else they want to go back to horses for transport and whale oil for lighting. Wood for heating and cooking is OK by them because they delude themselves that any CO2 released is magically absorbed instanty by growing trees, esp. those that have just been cut down for fuel.
    In other words we are faced with a barrage of propaganda from deluded nincompoops which influences are deluded politicians into stupid decisions. I cannot see any way out of this until we get blackouts.

    230

    • #
      PeterS

      You have given a good overview of how our political leaders are in fact the real terrorists and as such a committing treason, whether they know it or not. I am not saying that in jest. I am serious. It really is time for all thinking intelligent people to see that is the case and stop kidding ourselves by pretending it doesn’t matter. LIFE DOES MATTER!

      170

      • #
        RobB

        Yeah quite right Peter, the problem is that our elected leaders have been high-jacked. The no longer execute the will of the people. They do the bidding of others. They get together at summits and decide whats good for us. Thats not their job. Their job is to listen to the voters that elected them.

        130

    • #

      Very true Graeme. World leaders need to face the dilemma posed by a rush to renewables. The rare earths and precious metals required for batteries, solar panels, microchips, and electric motors (wind mills and electric cars) are already in short supply and becoming expensive by the day. Countries like Greenland have shut down mining of these materials for environmental reasons. Australia has abundant supply of them as well. But if our proposed hydrogen facility can’t get the go ahead because of environmental reasons, the environmental and cultural barriers to mining these materials in Australia don’t look promising for investors. I’ve already commented on the energy density issues with renewables compared to fossil fuels in an earlier post. (In units of watts/square meter coal is 1000, gas 5000-15000, wind 300-500, solar 5-20).

      110

  • #
    Simon B

    Any ability to quantify the ‘lost’ power supply to the grid being used by small generators using power off their roof due to extended lockdowns? I
    It just seems obvious that all government actions at the moment are completely ineffective or counterproductive.
    Thank god Australia voted in a government to ensure we didn’t go down the climate change road!

    60

  • #
    PeterS

    Jo, why are you blocking posts with links to B…chute?

    14

    • #
      Hanrahan

      because of the enclosed reference to a female dog.

      If you don’t want to wait for human intervention, think of a work-around.

      81

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes another mod.

      20

    • #
      PeterS

      I keep getting mod. for no reason at all. I suppose I’ve reached my quota for free speech here.

      17

    • #
      Analitik

      I wonder if any other sites use the filter that is applied here? It is appallingly indiscriminate in the way it detects “transgressions”.

      10

      • #
        Hanrahan

        Commercial sites have full time PAID moderators and are often retrospective – the post goes up and is taken down on complaint.

        I don’t see advertising or other commercial activity here so Jo depends on the kindness of strangers to keep her shoestring blog going.

        Have you bought any chocolates lately?

        61

  • #
    Neville

    We all know that Biden is barking mad and totally clueless, but even he seems to have hit new lows recently. Here’s his latest appeal for more + CHEAPER oil to OPEC etc after penalizing his own producers in the USA. This quote is from the GWPF and their link. Yet we may soon have the cackling Harris if/ when she takes over.

    So how does this make any sense when this Biden donkey has told us repeatedly that we are facing an EXISTENTIAL threat because of fossil fuels? DUH? OH WAIT we must now have a higher supply and cheaper oil to help save his backside. China, Russia etc must be laughing all the way to their banks.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/tilak-doshi-the-ipccs-code-red-versus-the-real-world/

    “In a “jarring contradiction”, just two days after the UN’s IPCC published its 6th Assessment Report warning of a point of no return in its climate crusade to quickly banish the use of fossil fuels worldwide, US national security adviser Jake Sullivan criticized big oil producers including Saudi Arabia for what he said were “insufficient crude (oil) production levels”. “At a critical moment in the global recovery, this is simply not enough,” Sullivan said in a statement.
    The jarring contradiction of imploring OPEC while yielding to climate zealots

    In British parlance, this is a massive own-goal, while Americans might call it a self-own. From day one in office, President Biden did everything to punish US oil and gas producers in the name of “fighting climate change”. He unleashed a series of executive orders that was meant to reverse his predecessor’s strategy of “energy dominance”.

    At a stroke of the presidential pen, the Biden Administration revoked permits for the Keystone XL pipeline to transport oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refiners; suspended oil leasing in Alaska; halted oil and gas leases on federal land; and cynically invoked the Endangered Species Act to block energy resource development on private lands in the West.

    Yet, what does President Biden do when US gasoline prices hit their highest levels since 2014? He implores the OPEC+ group of oil producers (which includes Saudi Arabia and its allies as well as Russia) to open the oil taps”.

    190

    • #
      PeterS

      He’s worse than mad. He even admitted in front of cameras that he doesn’t care that people think he is S.tan himself. Given he isn’t, at least I hope not, then he must like S.tan and perhaps even possessed by demons. He certainly acts that way.

      130

      • #
        RobB

        The neural network has gone down a long time ago.

        20

      • #
        Hanrahan

        Psychopaths are far more common in politics and boardrooms than suburbia. Joe is not really far down the “demented” path but far enough that he can’t maintain the veneer of respectability he once could.

        31

  • #

    Just when you think that Public Policies could not get any more stupid in Australia, the governments at State and Federal levels step in and correct your perception by revealing to you that they are World Beating Level idiots.
    At present Covid-19 and ‘Climate Change’ are leading fields for their activities.

    190

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN,here are human co2 emissions since 1970.
    Look at the COMBINED USA + EU and NOTE they’re no higher now than they were 51 YEARS ago.
    And lower since 1990 and then look at China, India + developing countries over the last 20 to 30 years.
    So why can’t so called scientists and govt leaders etc understand VERY SIMPLE graphs?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions#/media/File:World_fossil_carbon_dioxide_emissions_six_top_countries_and_confederations.png

    90

  • #

    Each day, while nearly everyone is sound asleep, the daily power consumption falls to 18,000MW.

    That happens at around 4AM, EVERY day of the year. That’s the absolute minimum it gets down to.

    At that same time, Coal fired power is delivering 81% of that 18000MW, so 14,600MW just from coal fired power alone.

    At that same time, the FOUR renewables (Hydro, Wind, Solar power plants, (Zero) and rooftop solar(also Zero)) are delivering around 3000MW.

    That’s the ABSOLUTE minimum on a daily basis for power consumption. At every other time across the whole day, power consumption is higher.

    The year round average for power consumption on a daily basis is 555GWH, translated to an hourly average of 23,200MW, and all FOUR renewables deliver just 5800MW of that average, 25% of what is actually being consumed.

    The maximum power consumption (the daily Peak) is regularly over 30,000MW in both Summer and Winter. At that evening Peak both versions of solar have gone to zero for the day, so the total from the remaining two renewables is around 4,500MW, most of it Tasmanian Hydro for that State.

    Until Renewable Power can deliver those totals ….. RELIABLY and CONSTANTLY, (something they will NEVER be able to achieve, no matter how much money they throw at it) then coal fired power, the ONLY source (here in Australia) actually CAPABLE to deliver that power will have a (very) long future.

    18,000MW while everyone sleeps.
    23,200MW average.
    30,000MW+ Peak.

    Renewable supporters can rabbit on all they like with their faux ‘truths’, but until they can deliver those totals, ABSOLUTELY, then rabbitting on is ALL they’ve got.

    Tony.

    390

    • #
      KARABAR

      Exacty, Tony.
      Another way to put is that the consumer of electricity expects and deserves an affordable, reliable and secure delivery. Anything less is not worth paying for.
      Renewables cannot deliver those attributes. Even hydro cannot offer security, as has been discovered several times in Tasmania.

      140

    • #
      Serge Wright

      If those figures aren’t bad enough, the numbers will only get much worse if we get forced onto electric vehicles, where most vehicles will be charged at night in residential garages, pushing up the minimum baseload generation significantly as well as the total grid demand. I did a rough calculation on this and came up with crazy numbers. Maybe you can cross check ?
      Assumptions
      – 700 million km driven by all vehicles on Australian roads each day
      – 2KW / hour charge required per km for the average electric vehicle – used Tesla S3 + allowing for 20% charge loss (+assume trucks and motor cycles would average)
      – Total electricity consumption per day = 1400 GW, or 58GW/hr (58,000MW/h) if averaged over 24 hours

      Sources
      https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/car-insurance/research/average-kilometers-driven.html
      https://ev-database.org/cheatsheet/energy-consumption-electric-car

      60

      • #
        RobK

        …..add to that a push to ban Natural Gas connections to new housing. Because.
        The grid’s energy delivery requirements at peak times will increase and ramp up costs all round.
        Pure genius.

        60

      • #
        Chad

        Serge Wright
        August 27, 2021 at 11:44 am · Reply
        If those figures aren’t bad enough, the numbers will only get much worse if we get forced onto electric vehicles, where most vehicles will be charged at night in residential garages, pushing up the minimum baseload generation significantly as well as the total grid demand. I did a rough calculation on this and came up with crazy numbers. Maybe you can cross check ?
        Assumptions
        – 700 million km driven by all vehicles on Australian roads each day
        – 2KW / hour charge required per km for the average electric vehicle – used Tesla S3 + allowing for 20% charge loss (+assume trucks and motor cycles would average)
        – Total electricity consumption per day = 1400 GW, or 58GW/hr (58,000MW/h) if averaged over 24 hours

        Well, you had good data …..mostly !
        But you c0cked up with the EV consumption data..
        On average, an EV will use 0.2 kWh per km driven ..as measured at the charger input
        IE ..it you put 10 kWh in from the wall plug/ charge point…the EV can travel 50km.
        So you calcilations are out by a factor of 10 !
        But you also messed up your units…GWh and GW
        And hence , using your conclusions,….total daily electrical recharge energy required would be 58/10= 5.8 GWh
        Which is less than a 10% increase of current demand..and could easily be managed with current generation capacity !
        ( but by the time full EV conversion is achieved, our generation systems will be very different !)

        21

        • #
          Serge Wright

          Thanks Chad, I messed up with a zero. But the 5800MW/h demand will end up being concentrated in the current off-peak period after 11pm, so if we assume 50% more demand during that period then it will increase the current 4am minimum by around 9,000MW/h, from 18,000 to 27,000, which is still very significant.

          20

          • #
            Chad

            Serg,
            Yes, it is significant, but it is well within the capacity of existing generation installations (35+ GWh) and infact is just about on the average demand line for the country.
            But , we will NEVER manage to convert to 100% EV transport, and i would suggest it will take 30+ years to even get to the 50% converted level !
            Remember also , many of the EV owners are the same mentality as the RT Solar tribe, and will want to use their own panels to recharge…..simple if we are still all working from home !
            ….and by then we could well have Cryptonite power or at least Cold Fusion,..personal drone taxi’s , etc …..a completely different world

            00

            • #
              Chad

              Serge,
              Just another thought..
              The biggest part of that 700m kms driven each year is in the category of “passenger vehicles” (cars etc) and the average distance each of those travels daily is approx 30 km…requiring roughly 6 kWh.
              That would only require about 2 hrs or less, of RT. solar ( no issue for the family school run/ shopping car) …or only a fraction of a domestic storage battery if overnight recharge is necessary !
              The point being, the EV/RE devotees will not be using grid power for charging generally, so even less demand on the grid.
              So being realistic, in 30 years , if 50% of vehicles are EVs, and say a third of those are using domestic solar for recharge,..then the extra demand on the grid becomes 2.0GWh daily…..in 30 yrs time ! …….Insignificant !

              00

    • #
      RickWill

      That happens at around 4AM, EVERY day of the year. That’s the absolute minimum it gets down to.

      This is no longer correct. Today the midday demand and 4am demand were close to the same. Yesterday the 4am demand was 200MW higher than the midday demand. Last Sunday the minimum demand at midday was 15.4GW, some 2.3GW lower than the 17.7GW at 4am.
      https://opennem.org.au/energy/nem/?range=7d&interval=30m

      The increasing volatility makes it ever harder for coal fired stations to follow the demand. Last Sunday, coal was supplying 9.4GW at midday but was up to 15.5GW at 7pm. That volatility comes at a cost for coal generators and why the coal plants need the subsidies to survive. But the current economic replacement in a volatile grid is gas and batteries.

      Without capacity subsidies, the next coal plant would be closed down in short order. The capacity subsidies will support construction of more gas plant that can respond to the increased volatility.

      61

      • #
        Serge Wright

        The green zealots celebrate those midday numbers as though it’s unequivocal proof of the success of their grand scheme, but remain silent once the sun sets, especially on windless nights and we rely almost 100% of FF. They forget that the grid energy systems must be engineered based on the worse case scenarios and on a long calm winter’s night the entire RE only approach falls apart. Regardless of this pending failure they press on with retirement of FF, hoping for a “continuous wind” miracle, whilst every engineer awaits for the pending catastrophe that will follow.

        90

        • #
          Ross

          Almost totally windless day here in regional Victoria. Blue sky with about 50% clouds, so solar almost useless. When the sun sets tonight it will be 100% FF electricity. From a work point of view I know with high accuracy what the wind speed will be in 5 days time. Gets me why we can’t manage an electricity grid based on these forecasts. All the wind assets are virtually in the same area, about a square of 300km x 300 km. I can forecast that next week it will be windy Monday to Friday. Hence, next week there is likely going to be multiple days with surplus electricity around lunchtime.

          30

        • #
          Analitik

          They forget that the grid energy systems must be engineered based on the worse case scenarios

          You give them credit where it is entirely unwarranted. Almost all of the zealots don’t have a clue on the continuous balancing of generation with even for active demand that is needed to stabilize a grid, let alone the reactive power components.

          I have a special category of contempt for those who do have the technical training to understand the requirements but who choose to still promote intermittent renewabubbles as a viable alternative to dispatchable generation – Alan Finkel and Bruce Mountain are 2 of the high profile culprits.

          60

  • #
    David Maddison

    We need to stop adopting a half-way position on everything.

    Either:

    Remove subsidies on the weather-dependent generators and let the market place decide. The Left keep telling us the weather-dependent generators are cheaper than coal so they should be safe without subsidies.

    OR

    Continue the present situation which will eventually result in the closure of all coal and generators and economic collapse followed by social collapse, at least it will finish off what the world’s strictest covid lock up rules hasn’t already done.

    You can’t have it both ways. Sadly, the PM is clueless and spineless and adopts a half-way “solution” on everything.

    141

    • #
      PeterS

      As I stated before, PM Morrison has no intention of supporting coal fired power. He’s too focused on reducing our emissions without coal. People need to stop pretending there is a middle of the road position as you say. Either we wake up and stop pretending everything is OK and that means we start building more coal fired power stations (and dams), or we stay as we are and suffer the consequences. At the moment it’s the latter road we are taking, and we have been for a long time. There is the obvious option to do both, namely reduce our emissions and supply power in a sustainable and reliable way – nuclear, but of course this nation is not mature enough to accept it. Japan, China, India and many others use coal extensively and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, who also all happen to use nuclear. Be as that may, we can be like children and play only with coal and leave nuclear for the grown ups. The main point is to maintain a viable grid system.

      92

    • #
      Ross

      Angus Taylor is no better. I thought he might be running a smoke and mirrors type policy. Spruiking crazy stuff like green hydrogen and pumped hydro etc in public but then assisting the coal/ gas generators quietly in the background. However, now I think he is clueless like the rest. Doesn’t matter if its Lib or Lab. He proclaims subsidising coal and gas as a major step forward, but cant admit that propping up the RE sector is the problem. Its like they think Greens voters are going to give them preferences at elections. La la land.

      130

      • #
        Dennis

        Subsidies for renewable energy businesses has ended or will end soon and effectively blocked a number of ventures from proceeding when announced a few years ago by the Federal Coalition Government. With a sunset clause attached to subsidies most potential investors have turned to other prospects to get a decent return.

        I believe that the push by renewable energy vested interests at the 2019 federal election, targeting real Liberal and National MPs in their electorates using union backed GetUp activist group was an attempt to overthrow government MPs who refuse to continue to favour renewable energy businesses and who believe that all technologies should be considered on merit rather than by government favouritism.

        Electricity pricing has fallen and is now less than it was heading towards before subsidies were given notice and other measures introduced to improve market competition between suppliers.

        61

        • #
          Ross

          I hope that is so Dennis. We started subsidising Wind RE about 20 years ago. So, it’s time to stop. In my regional part of Victoria there are several wind motion power installations (WMPI’s) still being constructed and plans to still build connecting powerlines. You actually have quasi government people in radio interviews contending the “lights will go out” if those transmission lines aren’t built. No, the lights will go out if we dont maintain proper practical base load power generation. All these wind turbines are well away from urban areas. So most cityites think they generate a lot of electricity. Time to build a few of these monstrosities in the city. Perhaps some turbines off the Sandringham beach (Melbourne) or even better Northern beaches of Sydney.

          60

    • #
      Lance

      Actually, there is an additional option.

      Require the RE suppliers to bid into the load with guaranteed day ahead bids for delivery without liability limit.
      Require the RE suppliers to pay for the operational cost of hot spinning reserves to compensate for RE inability to deliver.
      Require the RE suppliers to pay for the actual overhead, cost and profit required by thermal generators to provide reactive power, voltage and frequency support.

      IOTW, allocate the costs where they belong. Very quickly, a different cost structure would emerge.

      180

      • #
        PeterS

        Nice ideas but it will never happen simply because it goes against the agenda of the emission reduction alarmists. It would be like trying to convince them to use less renewables and more coal in the first place. I ain’t going to happen.

        40

      • #
        Analitik

        Requirement #1 would naturally take care of requirements #2 and #3.

        In Australia, it would only take removing the semi-scheduled classification for renewabubbles that lets them bid ahead without guaranteeing supply. Then the fines for not generating when they have bid + plus the very capped output if they do attempt to bid at a level to avoid huge fines would stop them being remotely capable of funding their upfront and maintenance costs, let alone be profitable.

        But as to your list, you can add that the renewabubble developers should also be responsible for installling/upgrading and maintaining the additional transmission capacity needed to transfer the power they generate from the remote regions where they are normally deployed.

        40

    • #
      PeterS

      The reason PM Morrison is clueless and spineless and adopts a half-way “solution” on everything is because he’s an appeaser much like Chamberlain was. We need a Churchill with the intestinal fortitude and the gift of the gab to make people change direction. Sadly we don’t have such a person, not even close, so we will have to learn our lesson the hard way. Howard was a little like a Churchill but even he lacked a lot of the qualities needed to be a truly Churchillian master.

      131

      • #

        Such a pity you gave away your gun

        19

        • #
          PeterS

          Yes it is but only for self defence. You have a problem with that?

          80

          • #

            The prime minister might attack. You never know.

            07

            • #
              PeterS

              I’m not afraid of that. I’m just concerned about my family and I being attacked by criminals and the like, especially now that the police are more interested in arresting old people sitting on park benches or anyone walking on the beach. Are you a pacifist?

              120

      • #
        el gordo

        The first wave of the pandemic saw Scotty talking like Churchill, he deserves some credit.

        What you crave is a totalitarian dictatorship and the leader adopting all your ideas, mind how you go.

        00

  • #
    M Allinson

    Joe Biden just gifted the Taliban a total of $85,000,000,000 worth of military equipment, including more Black Hawk helicopters than 85% of all nations.

    This was no “mistake” or “misjudgment” – Hilary would have done all this four years ago but was interrupted by Trump.

    The Covid “pandemic”, which some people still believe is a merely medical issue, is being used towards the same end – to break the West economically and socially.

    “Climate Change” is another plank in the same program – and to make counter arguments against the non-scientific claims is to be fooled into believing it really is about climate.

    191

    • #
      David Maddison

      Yes. No military leaves that amount of useful equipment behind by mistake.

      And you can’t blame Biden’s senility either, he’s just a puppet and doesn’t make the decisions.

      It is the evil puppet masters behind Biden such as Obama who are behind that decision. Their objective is to destroy the United States and Western Civilisation in general.

      141

      • #
        PeterS

        I don’t think one would need to go as high as that unless we include the Pentagon and CIA as their evil puppet masters, which is possible. They knew exactly what’s going on. The CIA even had a meeting with the Taliban leader according to the link below. As is noted there it would be very interesting to knwo what they discussed and planned.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TIHhSMdFFE

        81

    • #
      David Maddison

      (Copied from elsewhere.)

      Here is a more complete list of US-supplied and left behind equipment list now controlled by Taliban:

      -2,000 Armored Vehicles Including Humvees and MRAP’s
      -75,989 Total Vehicles: FMTV, M35, Ford Rangers, Ford F350, Ford Vans, Toyota Pickups, Armored Security Vehicles etc
      -45 UH-60 Blachhawk Helicopters
      -50 MD530G Scout Attack Choppers
      -ScanEagle Military Drones
      -30 Military Version Cessnas
      -4 C-130’s
      -29 Brazilian made A-29 Super Tocano Ground Attack Aircraft

      =208+ Aircraft Total!!

      -At least 600,000+ Small arms M16, M249 SAWs, M24 Sniper Systems, 50 Calibers, 1,394 M203 Grenade Launchers, M134 Mini Gun, 20mm Gatling Guns and Ammunition
      -61,000 M203 Rounds
      -20,040 Grenades
      -Howitzers
      -Mortars +1,000’s of Rounds
      -162,000 pieces of Encrypted Military Comunications Gear
      -16,000+ Night Vision Goggles
      -Newest Technology Night Vision Scopes
      -Thermal Scopes and Thermal Mono Googles
      -10,000 2.75 inch Air to Ground Rockets
      -Recconaissance Equipment (ISR)
      -Laser Aiming Units
      -Explosives Ordnance C-4, Semtex, Detonators, Shaped Charges, Thermite, Incendiaries, AP/API/APIT
      -2,520 Bombs
      -Administration Encrypted Cell Phones and Laptops ALL operational
      -Pallets with Millions of Dollars in US Currency
      -Millions of Rounds of Ammunition including but not limited to 20,150,600 rounds of 7.62mm, 9,000,000 rounds of 50.caliber
      -Large Stockpile of Plate Carriers and Body Armor
      -US Military HIIDE, for Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment Biometrics
      -Lots of Heavy Equipment Including Bull Dozers, Backhoes, Dump Trucks, Excavators

      131

      • #
        PeterS

        Perhaps it’s payment to the Taliban to hold off until the end of the month. Trouble is ISIS-K may not be part of the “arrangement”. Perhaps the CIA will now support the Taliban with more money and weapons to fight off ISIS-K. I suppose it’s better to do it the traditional way and fund one terrorist group to fight another than the fight them with your own troops.

        100

        • #
          Lucky

          Time to reuse what has always worked in the past.

          The US should now have an aid program for ISIS.
          ISIS have shown the necessary attributes.

          I call it’ The Alaskan sled driver’s bargaining strategy’ for use when attacked by a wolf pack.

          [sarc]

          00

      • #
        Ronin

        It’s obviously deliberate, not a oversight or mistake.

        80

      • #
        WXcycles

        Unless most of this equipment gets constant daily fuel support with a vast sum of money and resources, plus a continuous supply of operating consumables, as well as constant spares supplies, continuous maintenance support, and continuous training support, it doesn’t work past 100 hours.

        The Taliban couldn’t even operate the gym equipment left behind!

        It’s pretty clear most of this gear will not be useful to them. In fact the Afghan military were saying for about 6 months that they could not use most of the equipment once US contractor support was withdrawn, and it would fall into disuse very quickly.

        At best the Taliban sell/swap the best bits to China, Russia and Iran for some cash, and the US’s opposition gets a good look at what they were using, especially the electronic systems.

        The Taliban don’t have an economy or diplomatic and trade links and militaries need those otherwise they go back to being a bunch of squabbling tribal war lords (Islamic criminal gangs, like ISIS, for example).

        30

        • #
          Chad

          Spot on WX.
          With very few exceptions the Taliban do not have the training or skills to operate any of the useful gear..aircraft , drones, or weapons etc..
          PS.. the $83 bn quoted was the total for all equipment, facilities, and associated costs put into the war since 2001, much of it now destroyed, damaged or superceeded,

          00

    • #
      Dennis

      My understanding is, and I am not a Joe fan, that most of those military assets were given to the Afghanistan Government in addition to training their military personnel.

      On the other hand military personnel were not paid for several months and many sold equipment illegally for cash, but when they learnt that US air support would be removed panic set in and desertions quickly followed, Afghanistan troops were trained to work with air support and they knew they would be in trouble without it.

      Then consider the US abandoning military bases including their main airforce base after the President brought forward the timing for pulling out, more equipment was then abandoned I understand.

      Of course it’s a disaster.

      90

      • #
        PeterS

        When Trump was in office he set 1st of May 2021 for the final withdrawal date. Biden delayed the May 1 withdrawal date when he became POTUS. Why?

        60

        • #
          Forrest Gardener

          My guess is that the fact in your first sentence answers the question in your third sentence.

          Trump drove the establishment mad. Mind you it was only a short drive.

          120

    • #
      Chad

      M Allinson
      August 27, 2021 at 11:49 am · Reply
      Joe Biden just gifted the Taliban a total of $85,000,000,000 worth of military equipment, including more Black Hawk helicopters than 85% of all nations.

      A).. i do not believe that for one minute !
      ……..link to a reputable source or its just hearsay !
      B).. Why the fork have you posted that in this thread anyway ?
      ……..the subject of this is Australia’s power supply crisis.
      Why didnt you post in the “open” thread ?

      36

      • #
        WXcycles

        Agree, most of this equipment is useless to them, it’s value is in re-sales and swaps because they sure won’t be able to maintain and operate it against a modern force in war.

        00

  • #
    Neville

    There are many recent studies that show Arctic sea ice is now at high coverage compared to the last 10,000 years and for much shorter periods as well.
    Dr Christy used the 2017 Stein et al study that showed that today the sea ice coverage is higher than any other period EXCEPT the recent LIA.
    Here’s a number of studies at the link.

    https://notrickszone.com/2017/11/30/2-more-new-papers-affirm-there-is-more-arctic-ice-coverage-today-than-during-the-1400s/

    40

  • #
    Neville

    Willis Eschenbach also used the Vinther study to compare Greenland over the past 7,000 + years.
    Again the LIA was the coldest period in Greenland and the recent period was also cooler than the last 7,000 years.
    Greenland today is certainly “Way cool” compared to thousands of years ago.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/08/greenland-is-way-cool/

    30

  • #
    Neville

    And a recent NATURE study has found there has been no warming in Antarctica for the last 70 years.
    Dr Roy Spencer has found the same for the SP UAH V 6 satellite data since DEC 1978. Here’s a link to the NATURE study.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-020-00143-w

    20

  • #
    David Maddison

    On the subject of lights going out, I was recently alarmed and slightly amused when I was speaking to someone and he told me that in the area of Melbourne where he is there was a recent power outage of 3 hrs. He told me it was no drama as he has a generator. I said how do you connect that to your house, assuming he had a grid isolation switch. No, he didn’t have that. He said he isolates one of the power circuits by switching the breaker off. Then he connects the generator to a power outlet on that circuit with a male to male lead. I.e. the exposed pins on a male plug would be live…. He said it works very well, and I’m sure it does as long as he remembers not to touch the plug or reactivate the breaker before the generator is disconnected….

    70

  • #
    Chad

    Just heard on the news..
    Government is to “Fast Track” a new $1.3bn power station at Port Kembla , to be built by Twiggy Forrests outfit near the new Gas terminal also being constructed there.
    The plan is that it should be operational by 2024/5.
    It is being promoted as a “clean Hydrogen” fueled 625 MW plant…….but in the small print it is contracted to run on a max of 5% hydrogen !……so really its just another Gas Turbine plant .

    80

    • #
      Klem

      That is excellent news, but watch it be cancelled when the Leftists win the next election. Fossil fuel power isn’t about climate, the science is irrelevant, it’s about maintaining control. People must stop voting for the Left, I think it’s the only way to snuff out this Marxist flame.

      60

      • #
        PeterS

        Hit the nail on the head. It would even matter if someone came out with a new technology that allows coal to be used with zero emissions. The would still reject it. It’s all about power and control. Yes people must stop voting for the left but they must also stop voting for the fake conservatives. It makes no difference in the end which major party is in power. They are singing the same tune.

        60

      • #
        Chad

        Klem
        August 27, 2021 at 7:30 pm · Reply
        That is excellent news, but watch it be cancelled when the Leftists win the next election. Fossil fuel power isn’t about climate,

        …Which is exactly why this one is being promoted as a “Hydrogen fueled”. Power Plant !
        It is being sold as a potentially clean power generator !

        00

        • #
          WXcycles

          So what are they using the hydrogen for?

          30

          • #
            Speedy

            And how do they make it? From coal? Or from electricity? Probably the latter – it’s “cleaner”. SO you generate power (“clean” renewables, obviously) to make hydrogen to feed into a power station. The man’s a genius.

            Cheers,

            Speedy

            20

            • #
              Chad

              WXcycles
              August 28, 2021 at 10:42 am · Reply
              So what are they using the hydrogen for

              It is mostly just “spin” to fly under the green radar and fits with the other “Twiggy” project of building a Hydrogen import terminal in P Kembla.

              00

  • #
    Lucky

    The idea, of subsidizing coal to counter subsidies to competitors, is presented as illogical.

    Not so, it is quite logical.

    The requirement to make it logical is democratic interventionist governments. This system gives decision making power to those who have no stake in the outcome. Their payoff is not in power system performance, profitability, or reliability, or consumer prices. Their payoff is being seen by blocks of voters (interest group) as working in the interests of that block.

    The arrangement works all the time. It is the same as a corporation giving money to opposing political parties. Both are pleased, when they get equal amounts, or even when the amount is less than the other side got, they can strive for more.
    It works best with “Other people’s money”, tho’ in the case of a corporation, even shareholders can be persuaded that bribery works for them.

    40

  • #
    CHRIS

    Anyone who even considers Twiggy Forest as a caring environmentalist (just like Gina Reinhart) is an utter fool. These multi-billionaire “HAVES” could not care less about the environment or the “HAVE NOTS” that populate it. The world is transforming into the NEW CAPITALISM, which is based on energy resources (including so-called ‘renewables’). Check out Al Gore as a perfect example.

    00

  • #
    Chad

    The world is transforming into the NEW CAPITALISM, which is based on energy resources

    No,….it did that 150 years ago when coal and oil were discovered as primary fuels for industry and transport.

    00

  • #
    Michael Spencer

    But! But! We have to ‘save the planet’! Don’t you know anything?

    http://www.galileomovement.com.au/media/ShouldYouReallyBeAlarmedAboutClimate.pdf

    (And, I’d enjoy any feedback from Jo’s audience ….)

    00

  • #
    Rob

    How many wind turbines will be needed to power the coming mandatory electric vehicle fleet?

    00