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

Energy is Power but the West’s starving itself

Tell the children: Energy is Power

And show them this graph. For twenty years the West has been giving up power.

Primary Energy Consumption

OWID Click to enlarge

A warning from John Constable and Debra Lieberman,  Special to Financial Post

The energy of nations and the creation of wealth

 Countries where energy consumption is plummeting don’t feel much pain … yet. And there is a good reason for that. One country is increasing its energy use, propping up Western consumption with exports and giving us a false sense of well-being. That country is, of course, China.

Since the West began its energy starvation diet, Chinese energy consumption has increased by over 50 per cent and its electricity consumption has increased by 200 per cent, overtaking the U.S. by a large margin. China, unlike the EU, U.K. and U.S., is still 90 per cent reliant on fossil fuels and nuclear. What’s more, only some of the immense wealth these fuels are generating is being exported. What is China doing with the rest? Time will tell.

But right now, as a matter of urgency, we must reverse the decline in Western energy quality and consumption by ending impoverishing renewable subsidies and clearing the path for fossil fuels and nuclear. Toying with low-density, thermodynamically incompetent renewables is an indulgence we cannot afford. With the Chinese economy on an energetically sound footing and those in the West not, the world has turned upside down. The economic consequences of this reversal are serious, the security implications terrifying. Our energy blindness is both costly and dangerous.

Energy Starvation costs a lot

Energy demand is falling because of environmental policies, including subsidies to modern renewables such as wind and solar. As distasteful as this might sound, it is nonetheless true. So far, both the U.S. and Canada are relatively minor players, the U.S. having spent a mere US$125 billion between 2008-2018, and while Canadian national totals are lower, the province of Ontario alone is reported to have spent about US$30 billion in the period 2006 to 2014. But the EU, where the biggest energy collapse is observed, has spent a staggering US$800 billion since 2008, a total that has been increasing at $US70 billion a year. And the U.K., a country of 65 million people, is shelling out well over US$10 billion every year.

The intention of these subsidies was to reduce costs, but the gamble has not paid off — nor will it so long as Mother Nature and her laws of physics are at the table. Wind and solar remain stubbornly expensive for consumers in spite of a blizzard of misinformation and propaganda claiming otherwise.

Some sources of energy are disordered from the start — doomed by entropy

Moreover, energy varies in quality, not just quantity. To support complex society a fuel must be of high quality, that is, structured so that it has the potential to do a lot of work. In thermodynamics, this is referred to as a fuel’s degree of “disorder” or “entropy.” Greater disorder equals greater entropy equals less work. But our “energy-blindness,” the inability to easily grasp thermodynamic principles, means that we must rely on physics to see — and what it reveals is that fossil fuels and uranium are highly ordered and rich in their potential to do work, making them cheap, while wind and solar are the reverse.

Read it all at the Financial Post

John Constable is energy director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London and author of its forthcoming study Europe’s Green Experiment: A costly failure in unilateral climate policy. Debra Lieberman is a professor of psychology at the University of Miami and author of Objection: Disgust, Morality, and the Law (OUP, 2018).

9.9 out of 10 based on 80 ratings

141 comments to Energy is Power but the West’s starving itself

  • #

    Another very good and easy to understand Article which should easily be understood by any clear thinking unbiased person.

    70

  • #
    mundi

    There is a good argument to be made that Western society has peaked and is now ending.

    For many hundreds of years we have progressively unlocked more dense energy sources going from wood to peat to coal to liquid carbon to nuclear.

    The amount of energy per citizen is a direct measure of amount of natural resources being shaped for a higher living standard.

    Most western governments have expanded 8% PA since the GFC. Energy is down. Liberty is down. Virtue is almost gone.

    611

  • #
    Gerry

    A problem with society, whether Western or Eastern or African or Latino, is that the structures in place to manage it have led to the people with the most poverty of spirit and goodwill getting most of the power to decide how it’s managed.

    Most people in their relationships with each other are driven by goodwill, and an understanding of shared experiences. The people who are our leaders mostly are driven by greed, selfishness and revenge. The disconnect between the everyday persons good naturedness and the ill tempered nature of the elites and leaders is striking and debilitating for society.

    An obvious local example of this is in Victoria.

    620

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Could we frame that!

      It is so hard to discuss the human qualities that make a society “better”, but the world is currently in crisis and we need to start this conversation soon.

      Maybe we could start by identifying ugly controlling behaviour .
      Australians are going to have a hard job of shaking off the chains of media control when that media is intent on guiding us with their politically sponsored, touchy feely ideas laced with copious expressions of victimhood and guiltification.

      Shut them down and Klaus them up.

      KK

      270

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Those attracted to power are exactly those who shouldn’t have it.

      “Me ‘n me mates” have no wish to tell you how to live, therefore we would never enact many laws but would enforce others.

      40

      • #
        aspnaz

        ESG is enforced by Blackrock, Vanguard etc. and is not the result of government. These are corporates threatening other corporates in the marketplace: do ESG, suffer the increased costs, or be blacklisted from market-cost financial services. Who put these corporates in charge, how do they get away with imposing their economically destructive rules on the market place? As you said, these are not people who should have power: we did not vote them into power, these are corporates overruling governments. Why are these people not being proscecuted for manipulating the markets, for surely that is what they are doing?

        80

  • #
    David Maddison

    In the West, staggering amounts of money have been spent on unreliables. And they have bought no good, just misery, mainly to people in lower socio-economic groups.

    And now that Leftist governments are in place in all Western nations and Leftists are embedded throughout all institutions in accordance with Rudi Dutschke’s plan of “The long march through the institutions”, we have to ask, “just what are the limits to this unreliables madness?.

    We keep getting told that we don’t have enough unreliables.

    Well, how much is enough?.

    The answer, of course, is that the Left won’t stop until Western Civilisation is destroyed. That, in fact, is the ultimate objective of this insanity.

    510

    • #
      Lawrie

      David. I have been saying for years that the communists did not go away but simply changed the way they sought to destroy us. They gave up the weapons of mass destruction and instead used our complacency and false security against us. A few windmills here and there to show our concern has turned into an unreliable grid made even more unreliable by the useless idiots in power, think Bowen but lets not forget Angus Taylor who did know better but gave in to get a better job. We still have a chance but will we be brave enough to take it? As often stated here it will take an absolute disaster to wake people up. In the meantime the opposition should be making the case for coal and nuclear every day and to be challenging every idiotic statement by Bowen with facts. Ask the questions-how many batteries to get through a week long wind drought? What environmental destruction will that cause? Jo’s crew here could provide the questions and answers because we have been asking and answering for a decade or more.

      540

      • #
        David Maddison

        I agree, Lawrie.

        150

      • #
        Paul Miskelly

        Hi Lawrie,
        It’s fairly easy to determine ballpark figures.
        I’ll posit these here and allow “TonyfromOz” to fine-tune the numbers.
        Batteries;
        I’m presuming a 5-day wind drought in summer, during a prolonged real drought,
        so am using a required demand to be satisfied of, say, 30000 MW average throughout the 5-day period.
        Others may want to vary these assumptions.
        The Geelong “Big Battery” has a capacity, according to its owner, of 450 MWh.
        Number of Geelong “Big Battery” units required:
        30000 MW times 5 days times 24 hours divided by 450 MW/unit.
        I get 8000 Geelong “Big Batteries”.

        You can readily find pictures of it to get some idea of its size, number of Tesla megapacks, etc.
        Mr Bowen may need to be reminded that a battery is not a generator. Having squandered vast amounts of precious resources on these gadgets, they still require further squandering of resources to charge them.
        Incidentally, to reinforce the points made about energy density, or lack of it, in the article that Jo quotes here, it is sobering to be reminded that a 300 MW SMR nuclear plant can be expected to occupy the same space as just one of the many Tesla megapacks comprising the Geelong “Big Battery”.

        Now, how many wind turbines are required to even begin to replace our coal- and gas-fired generation?
        The peak demand at present – TonyfromOz, help me here – is some 35000 MW.
        The standard-capacity wind turbine is 3 MW, with a capacity factor of 30%.
        So, 35000 MW divided by 3 and multiplied by 100/30.
        I get something of the order of 39000 wind turbines.
        I gather that presently there is some 9000 MW of installed wind capacity.
        That’s, say, 9000 MW divided by 3 MW per unit, of 3000 wind turbines presently installed.
        Again, TonyfromOz could fine-tune and correct my figures.

        Perhaps that gives some idea of the scale of the task that Mr Bowen has set himself.
        There is lots that I haven’t included, such as the heroic amounts that will be have to be spent on augmentation of the electricity transmission network, etc.

        And we know that such a gigantic squandering of resources, the environmental impacts that will result, the vast additional amount of CO2 emissions that will result from the manufacture of all this junk, is all totally futile, completely and utterly pointless.

        Apologies for sounding like a broken record. I hope the numbers, and the working, are of some use.
        Regards,
        Paul Miskelly

        250

        • #
          David Maddison

          Mr Bowen may need to be reminded that a battery is not a generator.

          Indeed. I think he and his fellow clowns do indeed see Big Batteries, including the Biggest Battery of Them All, Snowy Hydro 2 as actual generators.

          Also, don’t forget that both batteries and pumped hydro have a round trip efficiency of around 80%, so Big Batteries cause an additional parasitic load on the grid. And that will be substantial when trying to run the whole country off batteries. It means an additional 20% of windmills and solar panels.

          100

          • #
            Lawrie

            The battery at Hornsdale has a capacity of 150MW and cost $100 million. You would need 2400 of them according to those figures with a cost of 240 billion. The Wikipedia item says that it is 150MW and 194MWh. Call it 200 MWh for ease of calculation and lets say the wind drought lasts for 24 hours with demand at 30000 MW. For one day Bowen would need 3600 of said batteries. Last week he may have needed closer to 10000 of them OR lots of diesel or gas generators. He hasn’t done his sums and he wants storage rather than fossil generators. There is a degree of lunacy here.

            70

        • #
          YallaYPoora Kid

          Nice summary of installations necessary, then there are the operational issues. Once all these batteries are in place the next challenge is to charge them while also maintaining supply. Another ridiculous scenario not thought about by the air heads.

          100

        • #
          David Maddison

          There is an additional problem of the availability of lithium.

          There isn’t enough accessible lithium for projected demand for EVs, let alone to run soon-to-be fully-unreliables-dependent countries like Australia

          https://fortune.com/2022/04/22/lithium-expert-says-supply-is-not-enough-to-keep-up-with-demand/

          Also, someone has considered the magnitude of hydro battery storage for the United States. No surprise that it is impossible.

          https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/

          60

        • #
          Lawrie

          A further factor is that as well as supplying the load at any given time extra must be generated to charge the batteries. Lets also add electric cars and buses. It is plain that Bowen and his advisors have not the slightest idea of either the scale of the problem he is creating nor has he any concept of the resources needing to be directed away from worthwhile projects in order to pander to his stupidity.

          100

      • #
        Graham Richards

        With Bowen doing his best to ruin the economy & now our new PM strutting his skinny jeans like a bogan preaching to the USA about woman’s rights when everyone else knows perfectly well woman’s rights will be protected by the individual democratically elected state governments. We are sinking into Socialist induced oblivion faster than thought possible!

        150

      • #
        aspnaz

        They can start by banning ESG.

        40

        • #
          Geoffrey Williams

          Lawrie, I cannot agree with your idea that the communists have created the current situation in order to destroy us (the west). The issue is not the communists. The issue is right here in our own country the with our fellow Australians who are ‘shafting’ our society with green renewable energy. Likewise in Europe and the US. If we go down the gurgler it will be of our own doing. Banging on about communists is not the answer and will get us nowhere !!

          20

    • #
      Ian

      “The answer, of course, is that the Left won’t stop until Western Civilisation is destroyed. That, in fact, is the ultimate objective of this insanity.”

      That’s a very strong conviction. What facts do you have to back it up? As I”m sure you are aware, conviction should follow the facts not precede them.

      030

      • #
        b.nice

        Seriously !!

        With all the far-leftist crap going on, you still haven’t realised yet that destruction of society is a main part of their agenda.

        Talk about blinkered to reality.!

        280

        • #
          Ian

          “The answer, of course, is that the Left won’t stop until Western Civilisation is destroyed. That, in fact, is the ultimate objective of this insanity.

          Talk about blinkered to reality.!

          How about some facts to support your statement.? Actually, I think it s you that is blinkered to reality as you never seem to be able to back your statements with facts

          In view of the war in Ukraine you might like to look at the link below
          https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/russian-politics-right-confusion/

          118

          • #
            b.nice

            Close your eyes ! Refuse to see!

            Its all you can do. !

            The very instigators of all this leftist crap like SSM, AGW, etc etc have stated loud and clear that the aim is to bring down western civilisation.

            You really need to start paying more attention.

            And why the petty distraction attempt to link to opinion pieces on Russia / Ukraine. ?? ?

            190

            • #
              Ian

              ‘And why the petty distraction attempt to link to opinion pieces on Russia / Ukraine. ?? ?”

              Why not read the article for yourself?

              You really are a true follower of Onan.

              19

              • #
                b.nice

                Yawn,

                You really are a boring, irrelevant little man. !

                Doubling down on the PETTY distraction.

                40

              • #
                b.nice

                “Why not read the article for yourself? “

                I read some of it.. It was a boring, irrelevant opinion piece.

                Just the sort of thing you would go for.

                As I said.. just a petty distraction.

                20

              • #
                Bozotheclown

                Sorry for you Ian. You took the topic off-topic. Then you try to make it THE topic

                Typical distraction that the “house” puts up with. Why I don’t know yet but I’ll learn

                I’m willing to spend some time pointing this out at every occurrence.

                00

            • #
              Ian

              I think my reply did not reach you

              05

        • #
          Graham Richards

          The main part of the agenda, destruction of the family is ongoing! Another 5/10 years is all it will take

          70

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        Yes, totally agree;
        more convictions are needed to bring an end to the current misdirection of human effort into the vast, eternal Chasm of Greed which covers the globe.

        140

      • #
        David Maddison

        Ian, the Left destroy everything because the leadership of the Left fundamentally hate the freedom that Western Civilisation offers. They are totalitarian in nature, and have managed to create a slave army of weak-minded useful idiots to do their dirty work.

        Don’t ask me why someone wants to be a totalitarian, I am a free thinker, I don’t understand the mentality of someone wanting to be some flavour of National Socialist or International Socialist.

        Dennis Prager gives a brief statement about some of the things that the Left have destroyed here:

        https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/left-ruins-everything-it-touches/

        100

        • #
          Ian

          Thank you for the very civil reply it is much appreciated.

          20

        • #
          el+gordo

          ‘ … the Left destroy everything because the leadership of the Left fundamentally hate the freedom that Western Civilisation …’

          In the 1890s the utopian socialist were in vogue and Marxist thinking was also doing the rounds. If not for WW1 we might all be utopian socialists.

          So when you speak of the Left, using a broad brush, you should do a little more political history research.

          16

          • #
            David Maddison

            It was utopian thinking, that’s all it was.

            30

            • #
              el+gordo

              Point taken, only writers looking for a new angle and bordering on science fiction.

              Still, Marxism only came to fruition because monarchs went to war. It quickly morphed into the dictatorship of the proletariat.

              00

            • #
              aspnaz

              It is also the hatred of capitalism. When climate change was offered as proof of the evil of capitalism, the left latched onto this scam as vindication of their prior convictions: they now had a fully powered up hobby horse that gave them vindication, moral authority, virtue etc etc …. all the things the left like, especially the feeling of “I was right”. Industry easily protected itself from all blame through mass marketing and market manipulation …. being a responsible capiltalist by doing ESG, Otherwise intelligent people have been willing to close their eyes and get that warm feeling, the knowing that finally capitalism has been put in the dog house. What you believe frequently depends on what you want to believe and the more far out your original beliefs the more desperate you are to grab at anything for vindication.

              50

    • #
      Ian

      I wonder where my reply went

      05

      • #
        exsteelworker

        Maybe Ian, you should go and talk to the extinction in their heads rebellion nut cases that are blocking Sydney streets and ask them why they don’t go and block the entrance to the CCP and Russian Embassies in Canberra.

        260

        • #
          Ian

          Maybe Ian, you should go and talk to the extinction in their heads rebellion nut cases that are blocking Sydney streets

          I live too far away and n any event talking to 16 demonstrators is hardly worth bothering with. Perhaps you could talk to them as you’re close by

          013

      • #
        MP

        Be under the same rock as your blind interlect.

        61

        • #
          Ian

          “Be under the same rock as your blind interlect.”

          When commenting on the intellect of others it carries much more weight if you can spell intellect correctly.

          36

          • #
            MP

            Great you found my missing L, or did you pull the one off your forehead.

            I don’t think pointing out my bad spelling is “news” on here.

            20

            • #
              Ian

              I also found your superfluous r

              You write

              “I don’t think pointing out my bad spelling is “news” on here.”

              Perhaps it’s because it isn’t recognised.

              02

              • #
                MP

                “I live too far away and n any event”

                I found this superfluous n, can we fit this in anywhere?

                10

    • #
      Philip

      Sounds like a conspiracy theory David. I ask myself is this all deliberate or stupidity. I think it is a mix of both. But that is just assumption.

      What I do know is when I was a lefty, I genuinely hated the west and would have loved to seen it destroyed, or “shared” was how it was described. So it would be foolish to assume I was the only one.

      50

  • #
    John R T

    Thank you!

    70

  • #
    Penguinite

    Energy anorexia!!!

    100

  • #
    Ossqss

    If our future is wind and solar, they should be easier to find on this global TES graph from the IEA after decades of spending trillions on them.

    https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-browser/?country=WORLD&fuel=Energy%20supply&indicator=TESbySource

    180

    • #
      David Maddison

      That graph is simultaneously both hilarious and tragic. Thanks for posting.

      90

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Out of curiosity I checked the Sth American nations and they burn little coal, a lot of oil and gas.

      It would be odd if that great continent didn’t actually have the coal. I wonder.

      20

  • #
    David Maddison

    Consider unreliables as a huge parasitic drain on both the electrical grid, the economy and society in general.

    Apart from the tremendous direct cost of the subsidies and cost of building the unreliables, there are huge associated costs, less visible, such as economic destruction, energy impoverishment of the poor, loss of economic productivity, ignorant people being stressed and upset about supposed environmental disaster, preoccupation of news media, politicians and research institutions etc..

    All to do with a problem that does not exist.

    Everyone, whether they are ignorant (a majority of people) or not (most people here) are the victims of not only the biggest scientific fraud in history, but the biggest fraud of any kind of all time.

    350

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    When you look at per capita, a completely different picture emerges. The FT story really just shows how mathematically illiterate that organisation is.

    126

    • #
      b.nice

      Yes, the FT is mathematically illiterate.

      Australia is a net carbon sink anyway.

      What is your point?

      You do know that carbon dioxide emissions from Australia are totally irrelevant, don’t you.

      Even more than your comments.

      Its that per capita consumption that helps maintain the lifestyle Australians are used to.. is it that lifestyle that you are complaining about and want to destroy ??

      How’s your total reliance on fossil fuels going, little hypocrite !

      320

    • #
    • #
      b.nice

      Love that first graph on your link, PF.

      It shows categorically how much of a waste of time space and money wind and solar really are.

      You nearly need a microscope to see that part of the graph.

      Why are you always so “unlucky” with the links you post ? 😉

      —-

      Energy per person…. Greenland, Russia and Australia are the same colour 😉

      Norway, Canada and Saudi Arabia are well ahead.

      Its a totally meaningless statistic, so, naturally, the one you would chose.

      190

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      just to help, although I doubt this will get demoderated

      Using China as the example here
      1. China as the world’s largest population – but a relatively low energy consumption per person.
      2. China has rapidly rapidly industrialized and moved most of its population out of poverty
      3. Access to energy in China is about the same as in the USA now.

      So when the FT says “electricity consumption has increased by 200 per cent” it does not mention the starting point for that increase
      for the west, the introduction of less energy intensive lighting, appliances, computers etc has seen a drop of consumption in NSW per capita consumption dropped 6% between 21017 and 2020, according to NSW EPA) .
      for Canada the FT claims “Canadian national totals are lower, the province of Ontario alone is reported to have spent about US$30 billion”. but Canada is one of the highest per capita energy users in the world.

      016

      • #
        b.nice

        You are saying nothing that isn’t already known.

        All you are doing is reinforcing Jo’s point that people need reliable obtainable energy to advance.

        Energy is what holds society together, allows it to exist and advance.

        Yet the left want to destroy that.

        There is absolutely zero need to force a reduction energy consumption, anywhere.

        All the western countries will do is decrease their standard of living….. which of course is the whole aim.

        120

      • #
        Ronin

        China like India, is coming off a very low base compared to western society which they are catching up to.
        Being the factory to the world, China has had to expand its power generation drastically.

        40

      • #
        Lance

        PF, your comment is proof of Thomas Sowell’s adage: “Everything succeeds or fails by irrelevant standards”.

        https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption
        https://ourworldindata.org/annual-co2-emissions

        China may have lower energy consumption “per capita” but it emits 27% of global CO2 and consumes 40,404 TWhrs energy. 1496 TWhr/%CO2. 9.8 Gton CO2.

        Canada emits 1.6% global CO2 and consumes 3,786 TWhr energy. 2366 TWhr/%CO2. 0.573 Gton CO2

        AU emits 1.3% global CO2, and consumes 1,547 TWhr energy. 1190 TWhr/%CO2. 0.5 Gton CO2.

        US emits 15% global CO2, and consumes 24,387 TWhr energy. 1625 TWhr/%CO2. 5.3 Gton CO2

        Energy/Capita means nothing without a comparison. Arizona’s production of Bananas is Zero. So what?

        Apparently, Canada is least efficient at TWhr/%CO2 and AU is most efficient at TWhr/%CO2. But Canada is about as insignificant as AU in total CO2 emissions.

        But China is the largest of them all in total emissions and total energy consumption.

        It isn’t clear what you intend to portray. Enlighten us.

        Oh, and the article referred to is from Financial Post (FP), not Financial Times (FT)

        80

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          Why is a per capita comparison bananas?
          Why bring CO2 into it? CO2 is not the subject of the FP (sorry FT) article, so that is just a distraction.
          surely everyone needs energy, and a country with a larger population will need more energy – to compare China’s total with the USA total without factoring in population distorts the picture.

          To claim that a 200% rise in consumption is somehow causing energy starvation in the west is bonkers.

          What you suggest, if I understand you correctly, is that China has no right to use as much energy as it does, based on the raw consumption figures. Is that right?

          05

          • #
            Lance

            No. China has a right to use as much energy as it can afford and effectively accomplish. So does AU, EU, UK, US, CA.

            But let’s not hobble everyone Except China with nonsense AGW/ClimateCrap.

            What say you?

            70

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              sorry you are off on another tangent, why bring AGW/Climate into it? All you seem to be able to produce is distractions

              06

              • #
                b.nice

                Again, PF goes on the deliberate child-like denial route.

                The current energy problems are all BECAUSE OF the AGW/climate change nonsense.

                Pretending otherwise is sheer ignorance.

                Its not a tangent, its a bull’s eye.

                20

          • #

            Aww, Peter, again you fail so utterly utterly where you say this:

            3. Access to energy in China is about the same as in the USA now.

            Again, here you are having a private laugh to yourself when you think you’re getting away (yet again) with telling us that you don’t know how to use the Internet. Okay, okay ….. we get it.

            In the U.S. the total power going to the Residential sector is 1476TWH for a total of 138 million customers. (from a population of 330 million) (EIA Data)

            In China total power consumption is 8060TW, and of that, 1080TWH goes to the Residential Sector. So that’s 13.4% of all generated electricity. (CEC Data, and that’s from the Chinese equivalent of the EIA) The population of China is 1.4 Billion.

            So China with 4.2 times the population consumes less power in the residential sector that the U.S. does.

            You can’t just ‘say stuff’ and hope to get away with it.

            This was just a flat out LIE!

            Tony.

            100

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              access is not consumption Anton – This indicator is part of the 200% increase the article talks about

              while I might me laughing, it is due to the opposite reason

              04

              • #
                b.nice

                You should be laughing at your incredible stupidity.

                Only a complete clown would continue down the deliberate LYING distraction path you are attempting..

                10

          • #
            b.nice

            “causing energy starvation in the west “

            Wow.. the deliberate PF mis-comprehension continues.

            Nobody is saying that China’s 200% increase is causing western energy poverty.

            The west are doing it TOTALLY TO THEMSELVES. !

            “Why bring CO2 into it? “

            An even more idiotic comment.

            Real Energy is all about CO2. that is what all the idiotic western anti-energy agendas are all about.. Don’t you even listen !!

            But yes.. CO2 emissions should be totally irrelevant to any rational discussion on solid reliable energy.

            30

          • #
            b.nice

            ““Why bring CO2 into it? “”

            I assume that you will now never bring up CO2 emissions when talking about energy… 🙂

            There is no need to.

            That leaves reliability, consistency, and cost as the only requirements.

            PF is therefore an avid supporter of coal as the first line for electricity, with gas for peaking, and hydro, nuclear where applicable…

            … but NEVER wind and solar.

            … and petroleum, oil, gas for transport and manufacturing.

            PF is finally on the side of reality. 🙂

            Thanks for agreeing that CO2 emissions do not matter. !

            40

          • #
            b.nice

            What PF suggests, if I understand PF correctly, is that Australia has no right to use as much energy as it does.

            Easy, PF… move to China if you want to be able to consume the amount of electricity that the average Chinese person does.

            But remember, you will still be on the very bottom rung of society, where-ever you live.

            30

      • #
        el+gordo

        ‘China as the world’s largest population – but a relatively low energy consumption per person.’

        The per capita argument is politics, if the greens were serious they would point to China as the biggest emitter.

        Crickets.

        90

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          bound to be the biggest emitter on a country basis, it is the largest country. that is why per capita is important. The only reason why people do not like it is that it show up just how extravagant their own usage is

          15

          • #
            el+gordo

            Still doesn’t work, its pure politics, the future of our grandchildren should be our main consideration.

            20

          • #
            b.nice

            Yes, your own use is extravagant.. I suggest to stop.

            Why is it you are so against people having access to plentiful reliable electricity and energy.

            Why do you so hate the very society that you live in.

            Must be a far-leftist thing. !

            20

          • #
            b.nice

            “The only reason why people do not like [PF rabbiting on about] it”

            …. is because it is totally and absolutely IRRELEVANT !

            A sign of prosperity, which the leftist like you want to destroy !

            00

      • #

        ” China has rapidly industrialized and moved most of its population out of poverty ” …..

        .Actually capitalism is credited with lifting hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens out of impoverishment ….After Maoist era Marxist collectivization policies starved and murdered 60 million

        00

  • #
    Robber

    “low-density, thermodynamically incompetent renewables is an indulgence” – brilliantly expressed!
    Currently, woke western governments are spending money like drunken sailors.
    Isn’t this how old civilisations collapsed?

    240

    • #
      David Maddison

      The collapse of civilisations is summarised in the Tytler Cycle:

      1) From bondage to spiritual faith;
      2) From spiritual faith to great courage;
      3) From courage to liberty;
      4) From liberty to abundance;
      5) From abundance to complacency;
      6) From complacency to apathy;
      7) From apathy to dependence;
      8) From dependence back into bondage.

      I estimate we are at (7) and well on the way to (8).

      240

  • #
    Neville

    Their so called Climate EXISTENTIAL threat etc is the most fra-dulent load of nonsense for centuries and the data proves the point.
    We can link to the proper data /evidence all day and every day but our so called leaders, MSM and so many so called Scientists etc are content to deliver more BS and nonsense as they choose.
    This sickness is worldwide and it’s hard to imagine anyone or group(s) that can make a difference before much more suffering takes place.
    China, India and other developing countries will continue to build 100s of new BASE-LOAD power stns for many more decades and nearly all of the net co2 emissions since 1990 have been sourced from these countries.
    How these delusional fools have operated for so long in our OECD countries without a proper reckoning is a mystery and eventually we’ll all have to suffer the consequences.
    Of course the security implications are terrifying and China, Russia etc aren’t stupid and will continue to industrialise until they think they are strong enough to dictate terms.
    How long that could take is just conjecture, but I think we should be more certain in about twenty years or sooner if the OECD countries continue to ignore the data.

    160

  • #
  • #
    Ronin

    I see Snowy hydro is being called on to increase production regardless of the risk of flooding properties along the Tumut River, just marvellous !

    110

    • #
      Murray Shaw

      Yes Ronin, SH has been pumping electricity into the grid at such a rate as to not be able to purchase enough cheap “off peak” power to pump the said water back up to the Tumut Pond storage and has filled Blowering Dam to unacceptable levels leaving no “airspace” for a big rain event, so Blowering needs to be lowered.
      An event that will run the Tumut River above flood levels.
      Now, about Tim Flannery…….

      150

  • #
    Ronin

    With dilute ephemerals, you can spend as much as you can afford and install as much as you can fit on your land, but you will never have energy security.

    101

  • #
    David Maddison

    The Left knew that in order to destroy our beautiful Western Civilisation they would have to first destroy the existing education system and especially the teaching of history, then control it themselves. It was all part of Rudi Dutschke’s “long march through the institutions”.

    Hence, how many children today or for the last two generations know anything of The Enlightenment, the miracle of the Industrial Revolution or the evils of totalitarianism; or see free enterprise, freedom of speech or even freedom in general in a positive light? And how many support traditional moral values based upon Judeo-Christian principles?

    150

  • #
    Philip

    “Tell the kids…”

    Have any of you tried to talk to a kid from the schooling system ? They are already brainwashed. Their reaction is to get emotional and call you a bigot. Maybe the next generation, but for this one, that brainwashing in the schools is extremely effective. Answer comes first, rationale for that answer was, science.

    Only thing I tell kids on this topic is their parents are lying to them. Most kids rebel against parents at some stage and I hope that seed sits there and sprouts when they do. I firmly believed in climate change for many years so there is some hope of change, perhaps.

    The one thing with kids is, they love energy, and freak out when it goes off, so….

    90

    • #
      RickWill

      There is a single compelling fact about Earth’s climate:
      No ocean surface can sustain a temperature above 30C – so simple.
      So what – well every climate model predicts that tropical oceans will exceed 30C over annual cycle. The are provably wrong.

      The limit of 30C has been identified in scientific literature since at least the 1970s.

      60

      • #
        RickWill

        Armed with this basic fact, it is enlightening to see how well the climate models of 2000 vintage forecast the current temperature in the most important weather related region of the Pacific Ocean. This is CSIRO’s effort:
        https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNhFZN77M55Pcnw-WW

        CSIRO predicted warming – it has a cooling trend since 1980. CSIRO predicted 2022 average of 29C where actual is 27C. CSIRO predicted sustained exceedance of the 30C limit – it never has.

        They are not even in the ballpark and yet their modelling underpins massive misallocation of precious resources for all Australians apart from those winning on government subsidies..

        60

        • #
          Ross

          I always love those graphs charting the prediction of all the individual climate models. The one that looks like spaghetti trending up. One or two of those model projected timelines ( year vs ˚C anomaly) belong to our esteemed CSIRO. On the same graphs there is usually charted both the actual balloon and satellite temperature timelines ( upper atmosphere). Those 2 lines offer much better agreement and can be seen way down the bottom of the chart with huge discrepancies between them and the “spaghetti”. The model lines aren’t even close to reality and the best of them is actually a Russian model!!

          30

  • #
    Philip

    ww2. The best military outfits, being the Germans and Japanese (kind of), lost. Why ? Resources and production, that is what wins wars, and the Chinese know it. The west is more concerned with trans seeking approval of children.

    70

  • #
    Neville

    Of course none of the IPCC or UN etc demands to lower co2 levels have had any impact so far.
    Here’s a NOAA link that shows the weekly data since 2012 and up to June 2022 the increase is 24.95 ppm or an average of 2.95 ppm per year.

    https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/weekly.html

    30

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Generator outages extend market nerves

    EnergyAustralia has advised of outages over the next few days at one coal power station and one gas power generator, underlining the fragility of the National Electricity Market after the nine-day suspension that ended last Friday.

    Managing director Mark Collette said the company has advised the Australian Energy Market Operator that one unit at its Yallourn plant in Victoria – where another unit is already offline – will close for maintenance within the next 24 hours.

    Meanwhile, a gas power station at Hallett in South Australia will be inactive for the rest of the week due to works being carried out by grid owner ElectraNet.

    The outages continue a string of problems at power stations across the NEM which have contributed to an energy supply crunch, exacerbated by soaring prices for coal and gas. AGL Energy also has a unit down at its Loy Yang A generator in Victoria after an electrical fault in April that will take until the second half of September to repair.

    In all, over 20 per cent of Australia’s coal power capacity remains offline even after some units resumed generation last week. Problems with coal supplies in NSW are contributing to the constraints.

    The finely balanced market is reflected in wholesale pricing, with prices set to spike into the several thousand dollar range per megawatt-hour in NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania on Monday evening.

    Mr Collette said EnergyAustralia’s other gas generators at Jeeralang, Tallawarra and Newport remained available to supply while the Yallourn unit was off for maintenance. He noted that the company’s gas plants have been generating seven times more than the same time last year, while gas prices have quadrupled to $40 a gigajoule.

    Mr Collette also confirmed EnergyAustralia’s support for purchasing gas to be imported through the Port Kembla LNG venture being built by Squadron Energy, the private firm of mining billionaire Andrew Forrest.

    Squadron’s incoming CEO Eva Hanly is keen to lock in other retailers as customers for Port Kembla gas, but both AGL Energy and Origin Energy are understood to either not need new gas until 2026 or to be baulking at the prices on offer.

    Meanwhile, Norway’s Hoegh LNG has revealed that Squadron’s Australian Industrial Energy subsidiary has signed up to a flexible contract to use the Hoegh Galleon floating LNG import terminal, with a start date between 2023 and 2025. The uncertain start date comes as Squadron continues to seek enough customers to justify the development.

    UBS energy analyst Tom Allen said the federal government may consider underwriting the Port Kembla LNG terminal by guaranteeing gas purchase contracts over the next three years to ensure it progresses, and to avoid shortages.

    100

    • #
      OldOzzie

      Offshore wind may take longer, cost more

      Offshore wind is unlikely to make a significant contribution to Victoria’s energy supply until well into the 2030s if not later, say experts, casting doubt on the ability for the emerging sector to play a part this decade in replacing closing coal power stations.

      Victoria’s Energy and Climate Change Minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, last week cited the state’s big expansion in offshore wind as one reason it can rule out coal and gas power plants from the “capacity” mechanism for the National Electricity Market.

      She said warnings from the Energy Security Board of “renewable droughts” in the Victorian winter were not valid because new offshore wind projects would “blow any shortfall out of the water”.

      But even as costs decline as the sector expands, the capital costs of offshore wind are likely to remain about double those of onshore wind per unit of capacity installed, according to experts at engineering consultancy Aurecon and CSIRO.

      That leaves the technology reliant on other benefits such as scale and greater consistency of generation to offset the cost disadvantage.

      A CSIRO report last year put the likely capital costs of offshore wind in 2028 at $5356 per kilowatt of capacity installed, almost three times higher than onshore wind at $1915/kW. But in this year’s draft report the estimate falls to $4085/kW, still more than double $1755 for onshore wind.

      The Australian Energy Market Operator said in its 2022 draft blueprint for the grid, the draft Integrated Systems Plan (ISP), that significant reductions in costs would be needed for offshore wind to feature in the energy mix.

      “Offshore wind has great potential due to resource quality, possible lower social licence hurdles, and proximity to strong transmission, but the economics are not yet proven,” AEMO said.

      “It is therefore not currently projected to play a large role in the future energy mix at current forecasts of future costs, unless land use considerations limit onshore development. Further, cost reductions could see offshore wind feature more prominently in future ISPs.”

      Victoria is targeting 2 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2032, starting with the Star of the South venture, costing between $8 billion and $10 billion, which is due to start coming online in 2028. The target then doubles to 4GW by 2035 and 9 GW by 2040. In all, Victoria sees potential for 13GW of offshore wind capacity by 2050, five times the current renewable generation in Victoria.

      Several other ventures are in the works, including Flotation Energy, Core Generation, Director Infrastructure and Alinta in Victoria, and Oceanex Energy and others in NSW.

      Mr Gleeson said that for consumers, the up-front capital cost was not as important as the cost of generating wholesale power, and in that regard offshore wind had an advantage because its generation profile was often better matched to peak demand in the evening.

      “These are the factors that help offset the higher capex,” he said.

      Still, even offshore wind farms cannot guarantee they can generate power at any particular time, said Grattan Institute energy program director Tony Wood,

      That limits its ability to act as a generation source able to produce on demand, as required by dispatchable capacity in a “capacity” market for electricity.

      “On the numbers I have heard, it is very expensive, and the benefit doesn’t seem to be that high: it doesn’t solve the problem of dispatchable capacity,” Mr Wood said.

      100

      • #
        Zane

        Translation: offshore wind is a complete and utter crock but the radical left loony-tunes government of Daniel Andrews is going to charge full steam ahead with it anyway because they get green brownie points and so who cares if it costs billions and makes no economic sense whatsoever.

        120

        • #
          Ross

          The main reason it is going offshore is because there is less opposition to their construction and probably the State Government then earns royalties, rather than individual landowners, when they are constructed on- shore. At the moment the Vic Govt are proposing off shore wind on the Gippsland coast. But all we would need is a rare migrating parrot to be affected by their construction and even those might get cancelled. Could also be a rare fish, dolphin or maybe whale species. What is needed is real opposition from some natural groups to either delay or totally erase any possibility of those off shore wind plants being built.

          60

          • #
            Zane

            CFMEU will decide yay or nay. Jobs. Yay. Huge wages. Yay. Lots of overtime. Yay. Offshore bonus. Yay. It seems the yays have it!

            30

            • #

              That’s a truly intelligent analysis Zane……Why did the energy and mining divisions of the CFMEU pursue [ unsuccessfully ] legal action to secede from the CFMEU apart from despising the thugs at the top ?

              00

    • #
      Graeme#4

      Where would a gas import terminal buy cheap gas from?

      00

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Energy is Power but the West’s is starving itself – An Australian Economist View

    Let the market rule the energy capacity mechanism

    Including coal and gas is politically tricky, but logically and economically easy. If fossil fuels can’t compete with other energy sources to provide electrons on demand, they won’t be used.

    Richard Holden Economics professor

    Economists often use a sneaky shortcut when describing trade in a particular good or service. We describe the good – say a banana – as just that and ask: “Are you willing to pay $2 for a banana?” Of course, everyone knows that means a certain type and quality of banana – such as nearly ripe, organic, from Queensland. But we almost always gloss over one crucial but embedded feature: a complete description of the trade is “$2 for a certain type of banana at a certain time”.

    That shortcut is pretty innocuous when it comes to bananas, but it’s not at all innocuous when it comes to energy. When you purchase energy you don’t just want electrons, you want electrons at a certain time. Like when it’s dark, or hot, or cold. And when you want electrons it’s a reasonable bet that lots of other folks want electrons as well.

    So it’s a welcome development in our national energy debate that the long-discussed idea of a “capacity market” (or “mechanism”) might finally come to fruition.

    It’s a simple enough concept – the ability to produce electricity on demand. It’s basically a contract: a call option on electrons. And plenty of very useful commentary has delved into the details of the “capacity” part of that phrase. How should the mechanism that implements this market be designed? What types of energy should be included? How long should the contracts be? When should the payments be made? What are the implications of design features for investment in capacity?

    Less attention has been paid to the “market” part of a capacity market. One vital thing a capacity market does is provide a price signal about the value of the true underlying good – electrons at a point in time. It fills the gap of what is in effect a missing market. Now that might sound like something only a nerdy economist would care about. In fact, it’s an essential part of getting our energy transition right.

    Costs and benefits

    Thanks to a lot of excellent science and social science, we know a great deal about the social cost of carbon (SCC). That is, what’s the environmental cost (the “externality”) of generating a kilowatt-hour of energy from coal, gas, hydro, or wind. The best estimate is that the SCC is US$125 per tonne – so about $180.

    What we have much less visibility into is what the social benefit of using energy at a particular point in time is. But we know that, in principle, it could be very high. Cooling homes in summer and heating homes in winter can literally save lives – particularly among the elderly. Nobody likes blackouts, but what are we willing to pay to avoid them? A capacity market provides the answer to these questions.

    Rather than take an ideological stance, we are in a position where technologies can be put on a level playing field.

    That means we can appropriately trade off the costs and benefits of emissions. If people are willing to pay $1000 for the energy associated with one tonne of emissions then, even accounting for the $180 social cost of carbon plus the cost of generating and distributing that energy, there’s a lot of potential net social benefit.

    Imagine we had an electricity market that involved, on average, 90 per cent renewables but at peak times used some amount of gas. Would that be a good thing or a bad thing? A hardcore environmentalist would no doubt say it’s a bad thing since all fossil fuels are bad.

    A more centrist perspective is that there will naturally be some amount of gas, or even coal, as we make our energy transition. What a capacity market does is provide a principled, market-based way to determine how much energy from which type of non-renewable sources are appropriate during the transition.

    It’s even possible that, if battery and other storage technologies hit technological and economic limits, that a small amount of gas would be used at super-peak times in steady state. Imagine 1 per cent of our energy coming from gas, switched on it such times when the price (and social benefit) of energy is incredibly high. The amount of emissions would be miniscule, as would the appropriately calculated social cost.

    What the Greens seem to forget is that it’s net zero we’re looking for, not gross zero. I don’t like coal mines any more than the @stopadani protesters. But we can’t pretend that all electrons are created equal. Some can be delivered at specific times and others cannot – depending on their source.

    And while you and I continue to demand electrons 24/7, there’s going to be a market for power to provide them. Right now that is going to involve some amount of non-renewable sources – probably gas. Eventually that will reduce. Perhaps a lot. But probably not to (gross) zero.

    The decision facing Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen is how to design the capacity market. He looks to be paying close attention to important issues such as how long the contracts should be and other design features.

    The tricky question is whether to allow coal and gas into the mechanism. This is politically tricky, but logically and economically easy. If gas and coal can’t compete in this market – providing electrons on demand – they won’t be used. The reality is that coal probably can’t but gas almost surely can.

    Rather than take an ideological stance we are in a position where technologies can be put on a level playing field. Let the (socially) best technology win.

    Richard Holden is professor of economics at UNSW Business School and President of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.

    40

    • #
      RickWill

      The best estimate is that the SCC is US$125 per tonne – so about $180.

      Only a true believer could write this tripe.

      CO2 has no direct impact on Earth’s energy balance. Ocean surfaces simply cannot sustain a temperature beyond 30C. No climate model has that hard limit on ocean temperature.

      90

  • #
    Zane

    If Twiggy thinks it makes economic sense to import LNG to generate power to make hydrogen to export, he might as well donate his billions to Vinnies right now and save the bother.

    It’s a fast way to bankruptcy. If it made sense, Qatar would do it.

    160

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      I’m sure he wouldn’t be doing it,
      unless he’s covered 100% by Subsidies.

      150

      • #
        Zane

        Ah, yes. Good point. The taxpayer coughs up. Well, at least LNG is real energy and I have a feeling we’re going to need it. The next recession might put the brakes on uneconomic green hydrogen dreams.

        90

    • #
      RickWill

      Twiggy is already a high priest of the Church of Cclimatogy. He could end up a cardinal if he plays his cards right. The nexus between Government and the CoC is strong. The CoC will garner far more from the hoi polio than the standard tithe.

      All those not in the Church or Government hierarchy will eventually become serfs; surviving to support the heirachies.

      Economics has changed. There is no longer a market balance of give and take. The CoC will take what they want and the serfs will be required to give all and take nothing beyond basic existence.

      90

    • #
      David Maddison

      NSW is offering a lazy $3 billion of subsidies for “green” hydrogen just waiting to be harvested.

      https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/nsw-s-hydrogen-hub-attracts-eight-times-more-interest-than-expected-20220326-p5a891

      The $70 million of grants are part of NSW’s offer of up to $3 billion in incentives to position the state as a global leader in the zero emission fuel source, which is expected to grow the size of the state’s economy by more than $600 million by 2030.
      28 Mar 2022

      30

      • #
        Ronin

        I hope those subsidies are tied to actual production of affordable green H2, not just take the money, faff about for a few years then write it off as ‘uneconomic’, like our hot rocks debacle.

        60

  • #
    David Maddison

    Apart from the fraud of anthropogenic global warming, there are two basic (intentional) disastrous errors that led to the current mess.

    1) When incompetent politicians made an engineering decision to allow non-dispatchable energy generators to connect to the grid. Intermittent generators should only have been allowed to connect to the grid on the basis of a known amount of dispatchable energy they could deliver. That means that the solar or wind generator had to be coupled to a battery system at the expense of the owner of the generator. I believe it was that pathetic excuse for a human being, John Howard, who first allowed this, as he gave away most of our gas supply to the Chicomms at the world’s cheapest prices, a contract that remains in force today.

    2) The allowance of the owners of solar and wind generators to make the harvesting of subsidies, not the generation of electricity, their primary business modality.

    140

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Why do you say the Chicoms got the gas and not Japan?

      Not defending Howard but back then gas and electricity were state responsibilities. It was up to them to sign take-off contracts for the gas but they didn’t. Without those contracts the projects died so they took what was offered. Simple business really.

      20

      • #
        David Maddison

        It is described here, Hanrahan.

        https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/how-australia-blew-its-future-gas-supplies-20170928-gyqg0f.html

        By 2015, it was being called the worst deal ever done. The Chinese by then were paying about one-third the price for Australian gas that Australian consumers themselves had to pay … and they were guaranteed to continue doing so.

        50

        • #
          Hanrahan

          I can’t open it and I don’t wish to subscribe.

          Did it say why Howard was to blame or what OTHER options were open to the exporters? The eastern states could have done what WA did or actually bought some off-take. This cheap gas would then be ours.

          30

          • #
            David Maddison

            You should be able to open it without a subscription. I am not a subscriber and can read it. You can skip over the pop up inviting you to subscribe.

            There were a number of contracts under the LibLabs but the one under Howard’s leadership was the first.

            00

          • #
            Hanrahan

            What does “under Howard’s leadership” mean exactly?

            00

            • #
              David Maddison

              It means negotiations were happening with his encouragement and support and he was happy to celebrate and take credit for making it happen at the time some imagine it was a good deal, despite its obvious flaws of no provision for inflation or market price adjustment.

              10

              • #
                Hanrahan

                That sounds more like assumptions than facts.

                LUV your 20-20 hindsight.

                Remember Costello sold 80% of our gold at the bottom of the market, I suspect because the US was bankrupting Russia at the time. Anything to help./s

                There is plenty of blame to go round.

                00

              • #
                Dennis

                Treasurer Costello sold a substantial portion of Australia’s gold bar reserve at a substantial profit, and at a time when the international price of gold was rising leading to the Labor opposition complaining that if the sale had been delayed more profit would have been realised. Well, maybe so, but maybe not.

                However, Treasurer Costello also pointed out that Australia is one of the very few nations that have huge gold (and silver) reserves in the ground, and if needed the government could soon produce replacement gold bars if needed, but they haven’t been so far have they.

                When I was last in Kalgoorlie-Boulder WA, gold country, I met a company director of a then soon to be opened gold and silver mining project that he claimed would be one of the highest yielding projects WA has ever opened, that was about seven years ago.

                01

              • #
                Hanrahan

                Dennis, why was it sold at all?

                10

        • #
          Hanrahan

          August 15, 2019, by LNG World News
          Japan still remains the largest importer of Australian LNG volumes, the latest monthly report by the energy consultancy EnergyQuest shows.

          According to the consultancy, during FY 2019, Japan imported 29.5 million tons of Australian LNG, 39 percent of the country’s total exports.

          Ninety-five percent of Japanese imports from Australia come from Western Australia or the Northern Territory.

          The average landed price of Australian LNG in Japan in FY 2019 was A$14.25/GJ (prior to regasification and pipeline costs), well above Australian domestic prices.

          China, the second-largest buyer, is closing the gap to Japan, buying 27.2 Mt last year, or 36 percent of Australian LNG exports. Australia supplied 46 percent of Chinese LNG in FY 2019 and remains the biggest supplier to China.

          Fifty-seven percent of Australian LNG exports to China in FY 2019 came from Queensland. Chinese companies have made huge investments in Queensland LNG and Queensland alone supplied a massive 27 percent of all China’s LNG imports.

          https://www.offshore-energy.biz/energyquest-japan-remains-australian-lng-top-importer/

          20

    • #
      Ronin

      “When incompetent politicians made an engineering decision to allow non-dispatchable energy generators to connect to the grid. Intermittent generators should only have been allowed to connect to the grid on the basis of a known amount of dispatchable energy they could deliver. ”

      That takes nous and some engineering knowledge or advice, something our politicians are bereft of.

      40

  • #
    John Connor II

    Energy companies in France have told the public that they must “immediately” reduce their energy usage as a result of Europe’s sanction war with Russia.

    As a result of a sanctions war between Russia and Europe, the French public must now “immediately” cut back on the amount of energy they use, the heads of three major energy providers in the country have now said.

    The demand comes shortly after Moscow dramatically reduced the amount of gas it is supplying to some European countries, while completely cutting off others seemingly in retaliation for sanctions imposed on Russia by Western powers.

    In particular, Engie Managing Director Catherine MacGregor, EDF Chief Executive Jean-Bernard Lévy and TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné outlined rising prices as a result of the crisis as something that threatens the “social and political cohesion” of France.

    “Acting this summer will allow us to be better prepared to tackle next winter and in particular to preserve our gas reserves,” the statement penned by the three reads.

    “We therefore call for awareness and collective and individual action so that each of us – each consumer, each company – changes their behaviour and immediately limits their consumption of energy, electricity, gas and petroleum products,” they continued.

    https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/06/27/public-must-immediately-cut-energy-usage-to-curb-threat-to-political-cohesion-energy-companies/

    I think they meant “the public must immediately reduce their dependence on lying, ignorant, incompetent politicians to protect the social cohesion..”.
    No more fuel guzzling Prado trips to climate activist events to wave Chinese made flags and banners then return to your hvac’ed business selling Chinese crudola, thinking you actually achieved something. Aaawww…😈

    120

    • #
      David Maddison

      Donald Trump warned them that this might happen and offered a solution which they refused.

      The voters who voted for idiot politicians have only themselves to blame.

      Let them freeze in the dark and enjoy their insects as well, since the Left want to outlaw meat as well as cheap, reliable energy.

      120

  • #
    Dennis

    Ever heard the Arab saying: the dog’s bark but the caravan moves on?

    The caravan we worry about is moving on and ignoring our protests.

    40

    • #
      Ross

      Someone in that passing caravan is kicking a can down the road as well. Which is why the dog barked. That can is a disaster waiting to happen sometime in the future. Or maybe a series of financial disasters, largely of our own ( mankind ) making. I am not talking about the effects of climate change, by the way. But, you’re correct, the whole Climate Change movement is now a runaway train. It is being propped up by huge government subsidies at all levels of administration. UN, countries, states, even at county or municipal level. Years ago I knew the theory of CO2 induced climate change had become almost reality. How? I opened my electricity bill and the power company had produced a cute little graph telling me how many tonnes of greenhouse gases I had produced over that billing period. That was when I knew the rot had set in.

      80

  • #
    Dennis

    Bloomberg, extract …

    “2. Does Australia produce enough gas for its needs?

    More than enough, but it exports about twice as much as it uses. Energy companies on the east coast — Royal Dutch Shell and Australia’s Origin and Santos — are locked into 20-year contracts with customers in Asia. Those deals underpinned multibillion-dollar investments in Liquefied Natural Gas plants. The exports have made the energy giants something of a scapegoat — especially after it emerged that supplies from gas-strapped southern states had been piped north to feed the plants. Meantime, domestic gas prices have tripled.

    3. What about all those natural gas reserves?

    Australia has the biggest in the Asia-Pacific region outside China, but much of that bounty will remain untapped. Several states have imposed blanket bans on fracking gas from shale rock, based on environmental concerns. New South Wales, the biggest state, has discouraged the practice.

    4. What’s the government doing?

    Getting frustrated. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is powerless over the states, which set their own energy policy and are mostly run by the opposition Labor party. Instead, Turnbull hastily convened a meeting with the CEOs of the oil and gas companies and provided an ultimatum: Increase domestic gas supplies or face limits on LNG exports to Asia.”

    Note: Gas (and electricity) supply in Australia are primarily State responsibility and they control development

    01

  • #
    Saighdear

    Mannn! thisis a grand series of articles from Jo. too much to read in one go, AND to read all the many good links from the Commenters
    So Yes and know ( and not a farm boy fae Nigg sitting on the fence ). Our Drystone dykes have More than 2 sides to them – and it all depends upon the foundations they’re built on.
    In a Nutshell, Affluent Society breeds Ignorance. Whilst the Chemists / Biologists of the world may have been affluent to find the materials to do their research, who was the Kiddo who started the Industrial Revolution ? I’m not a History person, BUT to cut through the various disciplines of , is it Engineering, or Physics, was it not one Jimmy sitting by the Kettle who ( can’t say “discovered” ) REALISED the power of Heat through Steam and developed the idea of Steam engines from there…. Rudolf Diesel also wasn’t rich.. . Harry Ferguson ( huh, look what we’ve got now : from a lightweight machine and fuel efficient, to a Heavy weight thirsty Land Locomotive ) ….
    So with increasing affluence, we do not need to learn too much about How things work ( Jings there’s a TV series for that, glossing over the detail, etc ) and go on to have excess recreational time on our hands – Now if you are of an inquisitive type, you may increase your knowledge, OR by other means, take a share of the populace with you on a wild goose-chase of misadventure. And this is where we are: following / or being Herded over the Cliff by these stupid Elites …. WE accrued KNOWLEDGE but now we have accumulated Rubbish . …..
    Yes Energy Consumption, per Capita, ,,,, is it direct consumption, or on their behalf? … Oh I’ve a job to do today – can’t go on but just had to make a comment since I see folk here agreeing yet disagreeing on similar things ( ? )

    50

  • #
    Philip

    The economic consequences of this reversal are serious, the security implications terrifying. Our energy blindness is both costly and dangerous.

    This is what Albo’s official investigation into climate security will find, and Albo will personally get a big red pen and draw a line through all renewable energy projects, because it is a security risk.

    00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Tell the children: Energy is Power

    Jo, if you want to be a science communicator… and I don’t even have to say the rest, you know what nit I’m picking.

    20

  • #
    CHRIS

    “Social Science” … a contradiction in terms. Trust Social Science to come up with this SCC nonsense. Absolutely no Science or Physics in this drivel.

    20

  • #
    Nick Chalmers

    “ And the U.K., a country of 65 million people, is shelling out well over US$10 billion every year.”

    So what would the total cost be per year if you also factor in energy price rises; transport especially?

    00

    • #
      Nick Chalmers

      measured in tertiary hospitals* bull-dosed into the sea.

      * i read once that a large metropolitan tertiary hospital costs about 1/2 a billion.

      00