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

The Climate War will never be the same: it was a lame Cold War substitute until real War returned

Ted Nordhous argues powerfully that Climate Change is simply not the main event anymore, and the climate punters are shellshocked.

Russia’s War Is the End of Climate Policy as We Know It

by Ted Nordhous, Foreign Policy

Tactical exercise with the withdrawal of the Topol mobile ground-based missile system in the Serpukhov branch of the Strategic Missile Forces Military Academy

Tactical exercise with the withdrawal of the Topol mobile ground-based missile system in the Serpukhov branch of the Strategic Missile Forces Military Academy

Virtually overnight, the war in Ukraine has brought the post-Cold War era to a close, not just by ending Europe’s long era of peace, but by bringing basic questions of energy access back to the fore.

If recent months have demonstrated anything, it is that war, insecurity, and economic crisis are merciless teachers. Climate advocates and their political allies have often engaged in the policy equivalent of smoking one’s own supply: They have confused the subsidy-driven growth of renewable energy with evidence that the world is ready to rapidly transition off fossil fuels. Hence, they discouraged the production of oil and gas wherever they could and chronically underinvested in other sources of clean energy, such as nuclear power. But while there has been technological progress, the global economy is still very far away from fully replacing fossil fuels.

Climate Change was the filler hob-goblin between the real threats

The issue of climate change burst into the global debate just as the Cold War was coming to an end. As one existential threat seemingly receded, another came into view. For much of the international community, particularly the United Nations and its agencies, climate change also became much more than an environmental issue, offering an opportunity to reshape the post-Cold War order to be more equitable, multilateral, and politically integrated.

And offering the UN a reason to grow, to be bigger, richer, more powerful. There were nice jobs, annual junkets and the feeling they were superheroes.

The political junkies will flex with the times, but the religious zealots won’t:

Much of the climate commentariat—politicians and policymakers, academics and think tank analysts, journalists and activists—appears shellshocked by the violent return of energy geopolitics and fossil fuel shortages.

The 1970s energy crisis left a long term mark:

In response to the energy crises of the 1970s, the United States, rich in both fossil fuel resources and technological capabilities, invested in almost every energy source imaginable. It accelerated the development of coal deposits across the U.S. West, built rail links to bring coal to the Eastern Seaboard, and invested huge resources in the development of unconventional oil and gas production, including shale gas, oil shales, and coal-based synthetic fuels. It also made foundational investments in the commercialization of solar panels, wind turbines, and energy-efficient technologies ranging from LED lighting to combined-cycle gas turbines to fuel-injection engines.

The West hobbled itself in so many ways. Not only by cutting off our own baseload power, but lecturing the developing world, holding them back, and not helping them build the infrastructure they needed. That left the door open to others to fil that role.

Resentment runs deep. For decades, Western environmental and other NGOs, often with the tacit or direct support of governments and international development institutions, have broadly opposed large-scale energy and resource development, from dams to mines to oil and gas extraction.

China and Russia, by contrast, have no such qualms and have leveraged investments in energy, resource extraction, and infrastructure to advance their geopolitical interests. Their intent is to create dependency in ways that advance Moscow’s and Beijing’s economic priorities while creating international leverage. Since the Ukraine invasion, the efficacy of this strategy is now plain for all to see.

The world reduced carbon intensity a lot faster before the UN got involved:

Facts on the ground told a different story. The carbon intensity of the global energy system fell faster in the 30 years before the first major U.N. climate conference than after it—a result of rising energy efficiency, the spread of nuclear power, and the changing composition of the global economy. After 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol was adopted, both total and per capita emissions rose faster than before.

Read it all: https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/06/05/climate-policy-ukraine-russia-energy-security-emissions-cold-war-fossil-fuels/?mc_cid=2f77b4a409

By , the executive director of the Breakthrough Institute.

h/t Benny Pieser and NetZero

Photo mil.ru

10 out of 10 based on 81 ratings

149 comments to The Climate War will never be the same: it was a lame Cold War substitute until real War returned

  • #
    Simon

    It is the fossil fuel lobbyists that have helped delay the introduction of alternative energy sources. Tring to place the blame on environmental NGOs is a bit of a stretch.
    It’s like blaming the failure of yet another coal fired power station on renewables. Economies must now adapt much more quickly as there is far less time.

    2102

    • #
      Thomas A

      Lol. If they did delay the introduction like you say, thank God they did. What a bigger mess we’d be in now. I’m loving the irony: Renewable energy getting huge subsidies; fossil fuel and nuclear about to get huge subsidies to remain productive.

      810

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        “Getting” and “about to get”, “huge subsidies”.

        Well put, and we must never, ever, fall into the trap of saying that that huge flow of taxpayers money was wasted.

        It went to places that were very appreciative of our stupidity and gullibility; thank you very much Australia!

        No doubt many “facilitators” of this nightmarish infliction on the Australian public are home grown, but most of the flow was , and is to places like China and Germany where the goods are manufactured and the Skim is greatest.

        How many months ago was it that Chinese Warships sailed into Sydney Harbour unannounced.

        We are in deep water and I don’t think that the word “lame” properly describes the Climate War where real science has been absolutely trashed and dissempowered.

        KK

        541

        • #
          b.nice

          “sailed into Sydney Harbour unannounced. “

          Unannounced in the press. The navy knew it was coming and specifically avoided altering the press..

          240

          • #
            b.nice

            ps.. If it had been announced in the press, imagine the Greens/Teals crowding the shoreline cheering them. 😉

            360

          • #
            Dennis

            The media really does treat us like fools, Australia is monitored by the US Military satellite system, the Pine Gap Base near Alice Springs NT is a major and strategically important communications centre for US assets..

            Then there is the RAAF Jindalee Operational Radar Network (over the horizon surveillance) and various other monitoring of air and sea approaches including regular RAAF aircraft patrols and RAN-Border Force sea patrols.

            So, according to the media China Navy warships reached Sydney Harbour without detection? But China Navy “spy ships” have been spotted off the coastline and thereafter kept under surveillance.

            40

        • #
          David Maddison

          Chinese warships invited to Sydney Harbor by Morrison.

          And look at the picture of the armed PLAN soldiers ready to shoot Australians with Morrison’s permission.

          https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-03/chinese-warships-enter-sydney-harbour-south-china-sea-claims/11172578

          111

          • #
            b.nice

            “He said it was a “reciprocal visit” as Australian naval vessels had visited China.”

            And I hope we had armed troops patrolling our vessels when we visited China.

            Anyone attempting to uninvitedly or illegally board that ship gets what they deserve, purely from a “Darwin award” perspective.

            90

          • #
            • #
              William

              It put out a load of chaff that may have been ingested into the engines but the plane continued to fly and safely land. I have not seen any reporting of damage, but I expect it was thorougly inspected on its return.

              90

            • #
              Ian

              “Am I mistaken but didn’t the Chinese severely damage one of your military planes yesterday as it flew over the South China seas?”

              The incident to which you refer was 12 days ago on May 26. Perhaps the rather late reports by the media were due to suppression of the incident for a few days

              80

              • #
                Ozwitch

                Chinese pilots are a bit renowned for it to be honest. Opposing forces have always played chicken and tag with each other, but there is a code that combatants normally adhere to – sometimes it breaks down, and a bit of paint gets scraped or metal dented, but generally no combatant deliberately damages another whilst not at war.
                Chinese pilots have quite a few times either ignored or deliberately flouted this code to the point we saw the other day – where some serious damage could have been done or injury caused. They were lucky – the Aussies could have reacted instinctively and escalated the whole thing to an embarrassing level. Thanks to their professionalism, nobody was hurt, but I can imagine the swearing that went on both in the cockpit and TPTB back on the ground. Grossly unprofessional and stupid.

                60

            • #
              Dennis

              They have done the same to Canadian Air Force aircraft flying patrols.

              40

    • #
      Honk R Smith

      Blame the non-believers.
      It’s a cult thing.
      Told ya’.
      🙂

      230

    • #

      I am not aware that the “introduction of alternative energy sources” has been delayed, Simon, quite the opposite in fact. We already have far more than we need.

      Ted puts it nicely: “They have confused the subsidy-driven growth of renewable energy with evidence that the world is ready to rapidly transition off fossil fuels.” I think you are exemplifying this confusion.

      671

      • #
        Richard C (NZ)

        Nordhaus >”confused the subsidy-driven growth of renewable energy”

        Or, as in UK, the subsidy-driven growth of non-power wind sector subsidies:

        Money For Nothing

        There is another interesting angle to Moray East’s performance though. According to the data held by the Renewable Energy Foundation, between October last year and February this year, the windfarm received constraints payments – cash for switching off (or switching down) – equivalent to 414 GWh. Over the same period, it generated 1209 GWh. In other words, it is being constrained off as much as 25% of the time! The cost to you, the consumer, was around £25 million.

        From one windfarm. In six months.

        It is hard to be polite about such wastefulness.

        From: Posts tagged ‘wind power’
        https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/tag/wind-power/

        Scroll down to comment – It doesn’t add up…

        Wind farms can bid to be constrained. The market clears at whatever becomes the marginal bid needed to achieve the desired amount of constraint. Any wind farm that can make money even at a lower bid has no incentive to bid significantly below the market clearing price. Consider the following wind farms, each of say a nominal 1GW capacity:…continues

        Not sure if this is a stupidity zenith or a nadir.

        70

        • #
          Richard C (NZ)

          Andrew Montford has updated his costings for Moray East offshore wind farm:

          My review suggested that far from being very cheap, Moray East was in fact on the expensive side, with a likely cost approaching £4 billion, for a windfarm of around nearly 1 GW.

          A year on, the windfarm has published another set of accounts, which reveal that in the last 12 months it has burned through another £1 billion – its spend to date is £2.2 billion. However, its website reveals that turbine installation only began in January this year. That means that there is well over a billion pounds of expenditure to come. That being the case, my estimate of the outturn cost remains unchanged at £3.8 billion

          And,

          With a capital cost of £3.8 billion, and a prospective load factor in its first year of perhaps 47% (i.e. the same as Beatrice, the windfarm next door), we might optimistically expect Moray East to have a levelised cost of £130/MWh, which is pretty much typical of recent offshore units.

          Which leaves us still with the mystery of why Moray East submitted a bid for a CfD at £57. It has been indexed up to £68 already, but even so, it’s hard to see how they make money in the short term.

          Except the LCOE makes no account of non-energy payments as previous i.e. cash payments (subsidies) for NOT producing energy. Which may go some way to explaining the mystery.

          40

          • #
            Richard C (NZ)

            >”the mystery of why Moray East submitted a bid for a CfD at £57″

            ‘The winners curse’ apparently. Also no performance bond for delivery at that price.

            Is the reputation of Scottish offshore wind on the line?
            by David McPhee | November 10, 2017
            https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2017/11/10/exclusive-is-the-reputation-of-scottish-offshore-wind-on-the-line/

            Moray (East) Wind Farm has come under scrutiny from a new report for the significant drop in their Contract for Difference (CfD) strike price from the first to second phase of the CfD auctions.

            The document claims that ‘it has been widely assumed that the underlying costs of offshore wind are falling and that the CfD prices indicate a sudden paradigm for the technology’.

            Yet, the report points to statistical analysis of the data, covering 86 wind farms, which suggests that the capital cost of offshore wind (£/MWh installed) is not in actual fact falling, but actually rising as a consequence of companies moving into deeper and deeper waters.

            Prof Hughes said: “In the oil business and actually this is part of the economics of auctions generally, there is a phenomenon known as ‘the winner’s curse’, it’s a very well-known phenomenon and actually it’s a trap that bidders time after time fall into. The winner’s curse is essentially: you win only because you got it wrong. In other words, only the most optimistic and most likely to be wrong bidders bid a price which will win the bid, but is almost certainly too low [to deliver].

            Professor Hughes believes he has a better idea. One that would make absolutely sure every offshore wind farm bid is genuinely achievable. He suggests the introduction of a performance bond, something which he claims are usually standard practice in these types of deals. He also believes that by not having them in place it evidences a form of government approval in a knowingly flawed process.

            “That very seriously changes the nature of the bidding process. It’s simply amazing that the government has chosen to go ahead with these Contracts for Difference auctions without posting a requirement for a performance bond. They’re just colluding, in my view, in overly optimistic assumptions. What the government has done is to allow these bids and hope that something will turn up.”

            40

    • #
      David Maddison

      Simon, what useful “alternative energy sources” have been stopped by the “fossil fuel lobby”? None is the answer.

      There are no useful “alternative energy sources”.

      The only viable energy sources for grid scale electricity production are coal, gas, nuclear and proper hydro (not Snowy Hydro 2 which is an energy consumer). There might be rare cases of other types of power such as tidal, or properly implemented geothermal – not what has been attempted in Australia – but these are exceptional and require unusual conditions.

      Modern civilisation requires energy sources that are constantly available on-demand 24/7, have minimal environmental impact (e.g. not thousands of windmills causing visual pollution, infrasound and destruction of wildlife or toxic materials for solar panels and batteries, often mined by slaves) and power sources that are affordable.

      The “energy sources” I assume you refer to are highly subsidised wind and solar which may or may not be connected to Big Batteries”. It is incorrect to call them “energy souces” as though they were viable alternatives to coal, gas, nuclear or hydro.

      Wind and solar can “produce energy” but only small amounts on an intermittent basis at great expense. And Big Batteries can only smooth output for minutes at best. A battery that is charged by wind and solar and that can take the place of a proper coal, gas, nuclear or hydro power station would be infeasibly large and expensive, even by the “open cheque book” and impractical standards of the Green Left.

      What of the economic destruction caused by expensive and unreliable wind, solar and batteries? What of the misery poorer people experience being cold and miserable in their own homes which I have previously mentioned? And I am talking about cases I am aware of in Melbourne, Australia. Naturally there are many such cases in Europe and America as well. People in colder climates of Europe and North America actually die due to energy poverty.

      Here are some questions for you:

      1) What is the problem that is meant to be solved?

      2) How does economic destruction of the West alter the weather?

      3) What is the theory behind CO2 causing “global warming”?

      4) What is the proportion of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere?

      5) How were periods of natural global warming such as the Minoan, Egyptian, Roman and Medieval Warm periods bad? How would it be bad now, even assuming it was happening for whatever reason?

      Simon, you have been reading and contributing to this site for a long time now. Have you not picked up -anything- about what is discussed here about the infeasibility of wind and solar or the non-problem of anthropogenic global warming? Sadly, this is the problem those of us on the rational side of fence face in trying to propagate the truth.

      What would it take to convince you? A question many of us ponder….

      600

      • #
        Sean Wise

        What useful alternative energy source has been stopped by fossil fuel lobby? There is one whose use declined substantially with the introduction of cheap kerosene, whale oil.

        240

      • #
        Leo G

        There are no useful “alternative energy sources” …

        Modern civilisation requires energy sources that are constantly available on-demand 24/7, have minimal environmental impact … and power sources that are affordable.

        What might “useful alternative” mean to a alternative energy zealot?
        It may just mean that requiring modern civilisation to use energy sources which can’t sustain it is a useful means of bringing that civilisation to an end.

        80

      • #
        Simon

        https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/renewable-in-electricity-production-share.html
        Share of renewables in electricity production
        Norway 98.4%, Brazil 84.1%, New Zealand 80%, Sweden 68.4%, Canada 67.7%, Colombia 64.8%, Venezuela 60.9%, Portugal 59.7%, .., Australia 23%.

        I’m sure you are also well aware that global surface temperatures will continue to rise until net greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to zero.

        021

        • #
          b.nice

          Poor Simon.. Disingenuous and gormless as always.

          Every one of those countries is HYDRO or some geothermal….. minimal wind and solar.

          Here is Portugal for example

          Also, CO2 has no scientifically provable affect on global temperatures, so your second sentence is just trite nonsense.

          160

          • #
            b.nice

            And of course, Norway, with nearly 100% Hydro electricity, is a massive exporter of OIL. !

            110

          • #
            b.nice

            Venezuela Energy
            Solar and wind are that fine line around the top edge.. get out a magnifying glass.. The rest is Hydro, GAS, and OIL.

            Brazil
            Hydro and fossil fuels, with a little bit of wind and solar

            80

        • #
          b.nice

          David said “The only viable energy sources for grid scale electricity production are coal, gas, nuclear and proper hydro

          So Simon’s list of countries reinforces David’s statement.

          Well done Simon, I didn’t initially realise that was your purpose. 🙂

          80

        • #
          b.nice

          It was noted , however, that you were incapable of answering any of David’s 5 questions.

          Nothing unusual about that, hey 😉

          50

      • #

        Good response Dave. But its the Biblical “pearls before swine”. The Green and renewable lobbies are happy with fraudulently produced graphs and data manipulation to show that the world is supposedly warming, and are also happy to completely ignore the geological history showing CO2 never drove temperature. So its not too much of a stretch for them to completely ignore physics and engineering, and throw in economics when considering renewables.

        We have a new Dark Ages upon us and the only way idiots like Simon will learn, it would appear, is when the hordes, ruined and starving, throw out the so called govt we have which is nothing but an enabler for luddite like Greens who will only destroy lives and businesses with their reckless policies.

        100

    • #
      b.nice

      “introduction of alternative energy sources.”

      Wind and solar are NOT alternative energy sources. They are erratic, unreliable disruption to to the grid, causing major supply problems because they cannot EVER be relied upon to meet demand.

      They require massive subsidies and mandated use to even exist.

      There is absolutely no rational or scientific necessity to ever consider them as anything but a very minor part of a major grid supply system.

      They are highly environmentally and economically destructive at all stages of their short life span.

      They are a parasite on any system they infect.

      551

      • #
        William

        anything but a very minor part of a major grid supply system

        I would argue that the only place for either is off grid, there are places where wind and solar have utility, but not as part of a modern power grid. It is similar to arguing that our maritime fleets can transition to sailing rather than diesel.

        120

        • #
          b.nice

          Yep, I agree.. an addition for use in places where reliability is not an issue, just so long as they work occasionally.

          eg, pumping water for stock troughs.

          100

          • #
            PeterPetrum

            Now, there’s a novel idea, let’s try it!

            90

            • #
              Ted1

              Not very novel. Pumps driven by solar panels have been in use for years. Windmills have been used on farms for pumping water for a very long time.

              I grew up with a magnificent 21 foot windmill on a 45 foot tower which pumped 600 gallons an hour when the wind blew right. I think it was 1957 it stood without turning for a fortnight in a heat wave and we were forced to fit it up with an internal combustion engine. Today it has mains power connected. The windmill is just standing there.

              50

        • #
          John R T

          Wind-power: a glorious gift for galley slaves and maritime merchants. Two millennial, ago.
          Blessings continue.

          30

    • #
      MrGrimNasty

      Simon, in the UK, for a large part of last Wednesday and Thursday the entire metered 25GW of windmill industrial complexes did not register, totally becalmed nationwide. That situation could last more than a month midwinter. Do you seriously think that this is a rational or economically viable engineering solution to cheap and reliable energy production that is a fundamental and essential human right in the modern world?

      520

    • #
      b.nice

      When wind stops blowing you get a “failure” equivalent to 10 or more coal fired units.

      And of course , solar is in “total failure mode” for more than half the time.

      390

    • #
      R.B.

      It is the fossil fuel lobbyists that have helped delay the introduction of alternative energy sources.

      As if they could have the same impact as leftwing controlled media and education.

      I was taught that burning fossil fuels was warming up the catastrophically planet in 1986. No fossil fuel lobbyist popped up his head. It wasn’t until the 2000s that anyone sceptical got any ink.

      Do you think that this free energy would have won by now? Conservatives love hydro. They are all for nuclear. Do you think it might be because of how poorly renewables perform that there is reluctance to go that way rather than love of coal?

      Do you think?

      As for the coal plants. They were designed and built long ago. Because of anti-coal policies, little is invested in their up keep or replacement. They were also designed to be the main power source, not put up with being an intermittent power source.maybe we need a post on what the strain of getting so many sources inputting their power in phase is having on these old girls.

      160

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        R.B.
        Upgrading our existing coal plants would reduce CO2 emissions by as much as all those turbines and solar panels we have installed.
        And cost less than the amount needed to counter the disruption that more renewables would cause (just think $2,500 million for a transmission line to NSW (if that government project doesn’t cost overrun) to stabilise roughly 2.5% of electricity generation).

        130

      • #
        Richard+Jenkins

        John Daly wrote, “The Geenhouse Trap” in xxxx. He promoted it on channel 9. John featured the tidal mark of 1840 in his book and his website was very revealing last century. Academics spent a fortune of our money to prove John’s tidal mark wrong and he made their reasoning look stupid.
        Stiil waiting for greenhouse?

        120

    • #
      el+gordo

      ‘ … there is far less time.’

      There is no rush.

      101

    • #
      William Astley

      People supported the green propaganda when the economy has strong and growing. There is obviously an economic storm coming because of decades of madness/unsustainable policies. The green brainless governments are running out of good economic times and money to burn.

      When times are tough governments must stop wasting money. Germany has spent more money on climate change than any country. Did the money spent on green stuff change climate?

      https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2022/03/PE22_N016_61.html

      Energy prices (German) in February 2022 compared with February 2021: +129.5%

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/01/business/germany-inflation-eurozone/index.html

      German inflation hits 29-year high as energy costs spike across Europe

      190

    • #
      Lawrie

      Simon. Wind turbines and solar panels work sometimes. Modern society works all the time and demand power all the time. The Indians also have wind turbines but they recognise they are intermittent and to reach it’s potential it needs a more reliable power source. COAL Simon COAL.

      https://humanevents.com/2022/06/06/indian-coal-makes-electricity-as-wind-farms-sit-idle/

      250

    • #
      Ed Zuiderwijk

      Is your first name ‘Simple’?

      180

    • #
      James Murphy

      The useful idiots who do the bidding of multinational corporations under the banner of “environmentalism” have oft repeated that fossil fuel lobbyists are responsible for just about everything that is wrong with the world.

      Meanwhile, renewable energy lobbyists are the ones rolling in subsidies, tax breaks, employing ex-politicians on their boards, probably giving kickbacks to serving politicians,, avoiding accountability, simultaneously damaging environments via different mechanisms on more continents than oil & gas has ever done, and generally getting away with what seems to be massive theft of taxpayer money like few industries before it (I guess they learned well from the defence/aerospace, banking, and pharmaceutical industries).

      The same useful idiots say that Murdoch buys all Australian elections, when they themselves vote for candidates openly and overtly paid for by millionaires… I guess their only real skill is consistent hypocrisy.

      190

    • #
      RickWill

      Economies must now adapt much more quickly as there is far less time.

      The desperation. It also demonstrates a lack of understanding. It takes way more energy to “transition” to weather dependent energy than it can ever produce so the energy requirement increases rather than decreasing. T is great news for the big miners in Australia as it fuels Chinese demand for iron ore, coal and aluminium.

      Why do you think all the big miners and global manufacturers are the main cheer leaders and proponents of the charge for Net-Zero? Take a look at the scale of subsidy farming that Twiggy and AGL are planning for their green hydrogen project. They want the lions share of the government largesse that is on offer for this nonsense..

      140

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Simon the people who program what you write are no good at propaganda.

      And find a different venue. Your efforts are wasted here because people have brains and know how to use them.

      150

      • #
        William

        No Forrest, he should stay and perhaps he may one day learn a few home truths – but then some people will be still be supporting renewables madness while sitting in a dark cold house while the food in the fridge gradually turns rancid.

        80

        • #
          b.nice

          I don’t think Simon has the slightest capacity for any real learning. He is too brain-washed.

          He has a cult-like lack of mentality that no amount of facts or reality can ever hope to penetrate.

          It is good that he posts his gormless, asinine, idiotic posts here, because it shows everyone just how incapable of rational thought the bog-standard climate cultist really is.

          131

          • #
            el+gordo

            Sadly, everyone I know in the real world think like him, atrociously brainwashed. Until the MSM alters course we can’t hope to get traction.

            50

            • #
              Ian

              “Sadly, everyone I know in the real world think like him, atrociously brainwashed. Until the MSM alters course we can’t hope to get traction.”

              So out of all the people you know in the real world you are the only one in step. What a unique position. How did you avoid the brainwashing when everyone else you know in the real world did not? Was it by scrupously avoiding all contact with the MSM? It would be fascinating to discover how you achieved your solitary journey when everyone you know did not

              07

              • #
                Ted1

                No guarantees, but IQ helps.

                40

              • #
                b.nice

                “but IQ helps”

                Which explains why Ian is so totally brain-washed in the AGW meme. Lack of IQ.

                As Ian has shown many times, he just follows opinion polls and what the MSM tells him..

                Science and logical thought, are not part of what he is capable of.

                40

    • #
      Geoff+Croker

      Carbon talk is driven by money printing. The change in momentum of the money printer is one of learning’s most powerful forces. It convinces everyone about the viability of an idea.

      60

    • #
      Ross

      Don’t you just love Simon. First into the blog, chucks a hand grenade, walks away.

      70

    • #
      yarpos

      “less time” till what? another faux tipping point deadline? spare me

      30

    • #
      leo

      Not much time for what, Simon? Are yet another snake-oil salesman selling this climate emergency idiocy? So please tell us how much time we have left before these awful things happen- – -might as well join the chorus of so many others who were wrong- –

      10

  • #
    b.nice

    “Economies must now adapt much more quickly as there is far less time.”

    Yes, crunch time due to erratic unreliable electricity, and the massive disruption to the grid has occurred very rapidly.

    We must adapt and rapidly rebuild our fleet of reliable electricity supplies.

    We must stop pretending that we can rely on unreliables.

    280

  • #
    David Maddison

    The Left, now the dominant political force in all Western nations, are fiddling while Rome burns.

    Actually, they are the ones causing “Rome” (the West) to burn.

    This is their plan.

    And they simply don’t care about the misery and poverty they are causing for the non-Elites or the destruction they are bringing to Western Civilisation through energy, social and other policies.

    320

    • #
      b.nice

      “And they simply don’t care about the misery and poverty they are causing for the non-Elites or the destruction they are bringing to Western Civilisation through energy, social and other policies.”

      It think they are actually totally oblivious or in strict religious denial… and wouldn’t care even if they did realised.

      210

      • #
        Vlad the Impaler

        At some point (and no, I do not know what that point is) they will care.

        The problem is, it will be much too late for any of them; and, I suspect they will continue to deny that they themselves were the cause (there’s an old quote from C. S. Lewis that has been posted here, and at Anthony’s several times; the gist is they they do all of this with a clear conscience because they are so ‘enlightened’ and morally and mentally superior to the rest of us).

        I would like to think that there is a way to stop what will eventually happen, but I see our chances diminishing, almost on a daily basis. I will keep the faith, fight the good fight, but will not be surprised when our ‘elites’ will be asking us why we are (re)acting the way we are … … …

        My Regards to all,

        Vlad

        250

        • #
          David Maddison

          C.S. Lewis:

          Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

          340

  • #
    Erasmus

    The BBC program The Climate Question became more accusatory this week – they are now going after the “climate deniers” who are apparently a small but effective handbrake on the transition to net zero! I hadn’t noticed any diminution of renewable madness, but perhaps they too sense some stalling in the rush towards the energy abyss.

    160

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      If only the accusers took the time to more precisely spell out what the deniers are denying.

      Somehow I think they don’t want to be more precise because science would bring down the whole house of cards.

      100

      • #
        Forrest Gardener

        How in the name of reason and logic did my comment kick the tripwire this time?

        60

    • #
      Steve of Cornubia

      Did they spell out exactly how this small number of “deniers” are delaying net zero? All I see is a high-speed climate change locomotive flattening economies and citizens’ rights is a pell-mell rush to introduce ruinous energy policies and underdeveloped technologies.

      120

  • #
    Erasmus

    And another thing, I suggest you make commenters comment sequentially, and not get to queue jump by “reply”, since this pushes earlier comments way down the page.

    55

    • #
      b.nice

      nah, too easy to loose track of a particular thread.

      150

    • #
      Annie

      No thanks. It is almost impossible to follow a discussion on NewCatallaxy because there is no nesting; one has to wade through a lot of inconsequential tripe to see a response and even then, miss it. This is particularly bad on the open threads with huge numbers of comments. A pity, as the odd very worthwhile information can surface there. WUWT uses nesting, thank goodness.

      100

      • #

        Erasmus has a point when someone goes to 1.1 and replies with “off topic but” and starts a long discussion about nothing much pushing considered comments further down. I’ll note two things.

        1. This didn’t happen above so why gripe now.
        2. Putting his comment at #5 is actually doing the thing he complained about.

        26

        • #
          Erasmus

          Why? because it’s not about today. It’s about every day. That and the trigger-happy m*deration has done it for me.
          Enjoy.
          See what I mean “management?”

          00

  • #
    David Maddison

    Did you ever wonder what life was like before electricity?

    You are about to find out.

    270

    • #
      b.nice

      I remember going to stay with my Auntie when I was 8 or 9 years old.

      She lived in a stone hut, earth floors etc on a block in the Blue Mountains, several miles from any power.

      So it got cold in winter.. very cold.

      A nice wood fire and a wood stove that heated the water. Candles and kero lamps

      But crikey what a gorgeous place, views were spectacular.

      Out riding the ponies, playing Robin Hood etc etc… we had great fun. 🙂

      270

      • #
        RickWill

        The first time I drove through Lithgow I got a sense of what living on a coal field was like. The early morning whiff of coal burners was unmistakable.

        I guess that has changed. It has been decades since I drove through Lithgow.

        80

      • #
        b.nice

        Actually, now I look at photos, I must have been only 5 at the time.

        71

    • #
      Annie

      We certainly had power cuts in England back in the 1950s. We used to sit around an open coal fire (until we had a Courtier stove), lit by candles. We would make toy goblets out of the foil wrapping from chocolate bars! We survived alright but life became a lot pleasanter once my parents installed gas central heating in the mid 1960s; the Servowarm system was hydronic without requiring a pump.

      80

    • #
      another ian

      I grew up with Tilley lights and wood stoves.

      Some years ago a friend sold his sheep property and bought a city business. His first 6 months report contained this gem –

      “I never realised how much of your time in the bush you spend looking after yourself”. Wood stoves were certainly a big part of that.

      80

    • #
      Ross

      My parents bought their first farm in the early 1950’s, pre mains electricity. Every morning he would trudge down to the lighting plant, fuel it up, get it started for it to supply a rather meagre supply of electricity mainly for lighting to the house. They had a kero fridge, lamps and virtually no other appliances. Clothes washing was done in a “copper” and clothes air dried after going through a wringer. Then at 10pm he would trudge down to the lighting plant and turn it off. Same every day. SEC hooked them up to “mains” in about 1954 and they were in heaven.

      50

  • #
    Dazza

    I find it funny with labor stating that they will end the “climate wars”; they will get their wish but not in the way they expected.

    250

    • #
      el+gordo

      The climate wars are back on the agenda now that Dutton is leader of the Opposition.

      A couple of years ago Morrison told the world we need to build gas fired power stations or prices will rise.

      91

      • #
        RickWill

        A couple of years ago Morrison told the world we need to build gas fired power stations or prices will rise.

        Building more gas fired generation would not have avoided the present situation. The problem of gas supply was recognised Federally in 2016 and the ACCC was tasked with finding the cause. This from their resulting report:

        In April 2016, the ACCC reported in its previous inquiry on the unprecedented changes in the East Coast Gas Market that had occurred in the preceding four years, with the development of the export facilities by the three Queensland LNG projects. The changes brought increased uncertainty and complexity in the market, particularly for C&I users that had typically operated with long-term contracts of low-priced gas, stable non-price terms and few difficulties renegotiating their contracts when they expired.

        https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Gas%20Inquiry%20-%20Interim%20Report%20-%20September%202017.pdf

        The Victorian ban on gas recovery remains. And the lowest cost fuel in Australia, lignite, is the devil’s devil.

        Turnbull considered gas reservation in 2017. I expect Albo will actually do this. Australia needs to protect itself from the stupidity in Europe and USA.

        USA is building more exports facilities for LNG while limiting access to reserves. That will supercharge their internal gas prices as it has done in Australia.

        Anyone who thinks that more investment in weather dependent generation will improve this situation is a simpleton. WDGs erode the economics of coal generators more than gas so reliance on gas increases.

        Energy, in any measure of time, is power in both engineering and political sense. Putin has the energy so wields the power. The winners are the arms manufacturers as Putin uses his energy income from the west to build weapons and the west supply what weapons they can to Ukraine.

        Putin has made Europe reliant on his energy. All the time laughing at their belief that they can power their economies from the weather.

        120

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Yes, the nation will become unified and the wars will end. Or else …

      It’s just the winner’s way of telling the losers to get with the program.

      Or in plain English nah de nah nah nah.

      91

    • #
      el+gordo

      This severe cold spell should not be happening in a warmer world. They said the snow season would become a thing of the past, massive fail.

      ‘This spell of wintry weather now looks likely to continue for at least another week, as a near-stationary low pressure system in the Tasman Sea drives icy air from the fringes of Antarctica over southeastern Australia.’ (Weatherzone)

      120

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    Simon’s first comment was just a little over two hours before yours. Many years ago the idea of sequential posting was in effect but led to people responding having to reference the original comment, and that was difficult as well.
    One method I’ve used once or twice is to get the link reference to the comment at the top and insert that in the response at the end of the queue.

    91

  • #
    OldOzzie

    EU’s New Climate Change Tax Will Exempt Private Jets

    Perhaps many more people on earth would take the climate change hysterics a bit more seriously if climate activists weren’t such raging hypocrites.

    The European Union is currently working on a plan to impose a minimum tax rate for aviation fuels. Their goal is to strengthen their fight against climate change by targeting an area of fossil fuels that has been largely ignored by carbon tax enthusiasts in the climate change industry.

    All very well and good, if not useless (the planet’s worst polluters are China and India), but we wouldn’t expect the EU to simply let their economy churn at a natural rate. That’s not very European.

    Enter Team Hypocrisy. For all the EU’s bloviating about how we only have 12 years 3 years 18 months a vaguely limited amount of time before we are all burned to shreds by a hateful sun,

    they very quickly made it clear they would be exempting private jets from the new tax.

    However, the minimum EU tax rate would not apply to cargo-only flights or to “pleasure flights” and “business aviation” – a term that covers executive jets.

    190

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN just for S Simon and look at 1997 and the steep co2 “take off” from China just 25 years ago.
    But the “other developing countries” have made a steady co2 increase and for a much longer period. When will you start to THINK for yourself?
    Then look at the EU and the USA data since 1970 or 1990 or 1997. What don’t you understand?
    Perhaps we should post this 50 + years co2 emissions data every single day on Jo’s blog until our delusional donkeys WAKE UP?

    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

    130

    • #
      Richard C (NZ)

      Neville >”…the steep co2 “take off” from China just 25 years ago” “… we should post this 50 + years co2 emissions data every single day”…”until our delusional donkeys WAKE UP?”

      Doubtful that the delusional donkeys will ever wake up – they’re in too deep and entrenched now – but I support your sentiment.

      I do an eye roll every time NZ emissions come up here in NZ (which is monotonously regularly) with some new virtue signalling policy or other “to showcase positive action to the rest of the world” – as if the rest of the world gives a toss.

      In the context of that graph of China’s annual 11,000+ million tonnes emissions, NZ’s fractional 82.5 million (0.0075) is a negligible consideration.

      50

      • #
        Neville

        Richard C you’re correct and according to Wiki NZ emits just 0.1% of global co2 emissions and Aussies just 1.1%. And that sometimes keeps me awake at night , but NOT because of their loony pollution idiocy, but just the incredible waste of TIME and endless billions $ flushed down the dunny.
        And nothing to show for it since the 1990s.
        But China and Russia etc are making the most of their time and money and are building 100s of coal fired BASE-LOAD plants for their future.
        Meanwhile western countries have lost all logic and reason and have compliantly surrendered to the totalitarian vipers within our countries and abroad.

        90

        • #
          Richard C (NZ)

          “the incredible waste of TIME and endless billions $ flushed”

          Opportunity cost to the West in economics terms. China loving it, thanks in no small part to Maurice Strong and the UN:

          As for Strong’s relocation to China, Rosett noted that the country was “a special place for Strong, a self-declared, life-long socialist.” How special? Well, consider this: although it’s “one of the world’s biggest producers of industrial pollution,” China had been profiting handsomely “from the trading of carbon emissions credits – thanks to heavily politicized U.N.-backed environmental deals.” And who arranged those deals? Who else? Maurice Strong.

          https://usefulstooges.com/2015/12/23/maurice-strong-dealmaker-for-china/

          The West’s economic advantage was planned to be destroyed and the advantage transferred to China, who have no intentions to curtail their advantage – now that they have it.

          30

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN , just for S Simon here’s the CSIRO’s Cape Grim site Tassie, where they tell us that the entire SH is a NET co2 SINK and the NH is the NET SOURCE .

    And the last time I checked the 32 countries from the SH had combined co2 emissions of about 7% of total global Human emissions of co2. I’ll check the data again today when I have the time.

    “Seasonal variation”

    “Carbon dioxide concentrations show seasonal variations (annual cycles) that vary according to global location and altitude. Several processes contribute to carbon dioxide annual cycles: for example, uptake and release of carbon dioxide by terrestrial plants and the oceans, and the transport of carbon dioxide around the globe from source regions (the Northern Hemisphere is a net source of carbon dioxide, the Southern Hemisphere a net sink)”.

    https://capegrim.csiro.au/

    110

    • #
      b.nice

      And of course, there is absolutely no scientific evidence that increased atmospheric CO2 does anything except enhance plant growth.

      This whole CO2-based AGW nonsense is based on figments and unicorns and low-level computer games.

      211

    • #
      John R T

      Earth’s human pop.: SH, ~ 9%.

      20

  • #
    rowjay

    Just started to read James A Michener’s “Caribbean” and two observations spring to mind from the first two chapters:

    1. Peaceful, nurturing and inclusive societies that cannot defend themselves against aggressive others don’t stand a chance of survival.

    2. It doesn’t matter how many human sacrifices are made to appease the weather gods. They do not listen to mere mortals.

    So, a request to the climate activists – stop sacrificing the population with draconian de-carbonisation measures when the weather gods are not listening, and do not weaken our military and economic defenses to the point where non-climate-activist nations can swallow us up.

    110

  • #
    Zane

    I still think the powerful oil & gas lobby are funding much of the environmental groups who are clamouring to shut down coal generation. They want long term guaranteed markets for their natural gas and a satisfactory return on investment for their multimillion dollar LNG projects scattered across the globe. These things cost $30 billion a pop to set up, far more than any coal mine.

    As for Europe, naturally the Kremlin wants a monopoly on their energy needs. That means demonizing coal and German nuclear via the loony Greens, and blocking alternative pipelines from the Caspian and through Syria.

    Oil barons the Rockefellers were behind the creation of the Club of Rome. Canadian Maurice Strong set up the IPCC. He was obviously a puppet. Who pulled his strings?

    101

    • #
      Ross

      Interesting factoid I learnt about Rockefeller and the term ” fossil fuels”. Every time you hear the term” fossil fuel” in the media you’re being lied to. It’s one of those misnomers like “renewable energy”. Apparently in 1892 at the Geneva convention J. D Rockefeller paid scientists to use the term “fossil fuel”. Old J.D was a clever man. What he wanted people to perceive was that oil was fossil derived and so “scarce”. This allowed a world price for oil to be set and the idea that there are limited supplies of the commodity. What’s true? Oil is the second most prevalent liquid on earth (water most prevalent). It certainly doesn’t come from fossils or dinosaurs (or anything close )and some argue it is being regenerated or produced faster than we can use it.

      30

      • #
        Zane

        It’s a bit like De Beers and the diamond monopoly. Create demand through advertising, then pretend the supply is limited thus achieving huge profit margins. A $20 diamond in Equatorial Guinea magically becomes a $2000 stone on a ring in New York.

        10

  • #
    Furiously+Curious

    I think most people here have realised that ‘The Climate Crisis’ was always just another tool in the bag to use in the destruction of the West; along with the destruction of self responsibility, masculinity, femininity, the family, and children.
    This has actually been trialled before, and it even had a catchy name, that has been conveniently forgotten. I think looking at the hard left, the greens, and extinction rebellion, the term ‘Year Zero’ has a real resonance. Cambodia in the 70’s, when the intelligensia emptied the cities into re education camps, and killed a million people who just couldn’t seem to fit in. They seem a bit skittish about using Year Zero, but I think it has a resonance. Obviously they have made a big mistake in banning single use plastic bags.

    121

    • #
      David Maddison

      The only difference is that the marketing people changed the name from “Year Zero” to “Net Zero”…

      80

  • #
    Richard C (NZ)

    Cold war’s making a comeback:

    “It’s been a pretty cold start to the winter in Victoria, South Australia, NSW and Tasmania,” said Bureau of Meteorology forecaster Jonathan How. “We’re expecting those cold conditions to continue … We’ll see the cold air spread up into northern NSW and even parts of southern and central Queensland through the week.”

    The meteorologist added that the persistent nature of the cold was rare. Australia is onto its third consecutive major cold system. Back-to-back systems are rare. Three in a row is virtually unheard of.

    “The most unusual aspect is how long it’s lasting … it’s definitely unusual to see such a long stretch of cold air. Canberra this week … had three days in a row below I0C, which hasn’t happened since 2009 [solar minimum of cycle 23]. Melbourne, too, has had quite an extended run.”

    As well as bringing persistent, anomalous cold to much of Australia, the Antarctic fronts are also responsible for the continent’s best start to a ski season in 50+ years.

    https://electroverse.net/australias-conveyor-belt-of-cold-fronts-to-continueu-s-suffers-record-late-season-snow-asia-turns-to-eu-wheat/

    60

  • #
    David Maddison

    I wonder what the Left will consider to be an “acceptable” death toll from people dying from energy poverty, especially in colder places like North America or Europe?

    And in Australia, I don’t think it generally gets quite cold enough for people to die from cold in their homes, but they just get very miserable.

    However, in Australia, because all telephony is now digital and there is poor or no backup at exchanges, people will die due to inability to call emergency services during inevitable forthcoming grid-down events.

    131

  • #
    Grant

    My 2 cent’s worth on the current Australian situation.

    1. The Coalition loss was a good thing, it cleaned out some of the Linos (Liberal in name only) and has forced the Liberals to re-think their position, the lurch to the left by the Nats with David, Little to be Proud of is a minor disappointment.
    2. Labor with the Greens in the Driver’s seat for any legislation they need to pass the Senate will stay committed to the Renewables fallacy, so the likelihood of increased coal and gas exploration/development is unlikely let alone a serious discussion of Nuclear.
    3. Rolling blackouts and/or the collapse of energy intensive manufacturing combined with deaths in the tenements of Melbourne as pensioners can afford neither food nor heat will become a grim reality.
    4. Only the impacts of 3 will force the majority to ask the question, How did we get here? If Dutton is Smart and Brave enough, he will answer that question by admitting that the fault lies in decades of misdirected policy reducing development of reliable energy sources and subsidising the growth of renewable parasite energy sources instead, and that the answer is to introduce new clean and efficient FF power generation while transitioning baseload power to Nuclear.
    The Renewables utopian dream for Australia is a fallacy, Only Tasmania has the capability of 100% renewables through a combination of large hydro, small scale solar and wind. Or if the greens could rationalise the ridiculous position that Dams are bad because of landscape changes, but wind is good, despite massively destructive landscape and wildlife impacts, 100% hydro (Gordon below Franklin would double current hydro capabilities). The rest of this wide brown (dry and flat) land needs real energy solutions and for that I am afraid the answer is NOT blowing in the wind!

    132

    • #
      RickWill

      Only Tasmania has the capability of 100% renewables through a combination of large hydro, small scale solar and wind.

      The solar resource is limited in Tasmania. At grid level, it is more economic to invest in wind to conserve perched water than on grid scale solar. Economics are improved if they set up a solar farm near Mildura for example. I recall mention of Bass-link being duplicated so generating assets in Victoria could be used to supply more from Victoria.

      Solar resource in Mildura is almost twice the resource in Hobart. And there is a lot more flat open space around Mildura than around Hobart.

      40

    • #
      Ross

      Grant, during the millennial drought Tassie rain out of water and couldn’t produce electricity from hydro. They were one of the first capital cities to temporarily install a huge bank of diesel generators to power the state. It was kept a secret of course and once it rained again in 2012 , they were shut down and shipped off somewhere else. There was also the problem of a breakdown in the interconnector to Victoria as well. So Tassie cant actually run on !00 % renewables either. They have back up to brown coal produced electricity from the mainland.

      30

      • #
        Grant

        Ross, the only reason that happened was because the Carbon Tax encouraged the then Labor Government in Tas to run the dams well below the safety margins set years earlier by Hydro Tas. Incidentally, that power pumping for carbon windfalls also lead to the failure of the interconnector (Bass Link) It was the failure of Bass Link that required the Diesel Generators.

        Failure of Policy all the way.

        10

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN I’ve just checked all 32 SH countries’ co2 emissions data from the Wiki link ( UN data) and their total is under 7%. That’s counting Brazil as well.
    And that tiny number is absorbed by the natural SH SINK.
    Most countries in the SH are very poor and effectively have no co2 emissions anyway and the TOTAL population of the SH is about 0.8 billion or 800 million people.
    Just think, the population of Africa ( 53 countries ) has increased by OVER one billion people (now 1.4bn + all healthier, wealthier)) since 1970 and yet we’re supposed to BELIEVE that we have a climate CRISIS?
    And the global population has increased by 4.2 billion people since 1970 and the data proves we are healthier and wealthier and enjoy a much higher life expectancy.
    Never forget that over 80% of TOTAL global energy today comes from Fossil fuels and we should only build reliable BASE-LOAD energy for our future Aussie requirements.

    81

  • #
    RickWill

    Average wholesale price for the last 30 days in the NEM is $400/MWh.

    This will be providing ACT electricity with windfall gains. They were first and best dressed State/Territory in this new Ponzi scheme. So we can all take solace in the knowledge that the ACT electricity consumers are winning and will pay less for electricity as they are subsidised by the rest of Australia.

    I always felt the $660/MWh that I got for my exported electricity was an unbelievable windfall but now it is just average. Adding the retail charges to the current wholesale price pushes the retail cost over $600/MWh.

    Anyone who can take advantage of the government largesse should. Take the pragmatic approach. Just treat handouts as reducing the tax take.

    The higher global energy costs will flow through into solar panels and batteries but current prices for these items do not reflect the current inflation. There is no doubt rooftop solar and battery can produce electricity at lower cost than $600/MWh.

    41

    • #
      RickWill

      The current situation in the ACT is already being touted as a success story for “renewables”.

      https://reneweconomy.com.au/acts-electricity-prices-to-fall-as-renewables-provide-shield-from-energy-market-chaos/

      Electricity users in the Australian Capital Territory will see average electricity costs fall by at least 1.25 per cent come 1 July, as the capital territory’s extensive contracts for 100 per cent renewable electricity shield its consumers from the chaos rippling through Australia’s energy markets.

      This will be what those in Canberra see. They will not realise it is a well disguised Ponzi scheme that the rest of Australia is paying for; unless you are also into the Ponzi.

      51

  • #
    David Maddison

    Australia is not a democracy or even a representative democracy. It is a minocracy. Here is the definition from Urban Dictionary.

    Minocracy

    Is a system of social imbalance where a minority (or many minority groups) dictate and set the rules for the majority to follow.

    111

  • #
    David Maddison

    Perhaps a better term than “energy poverty” is “energy starvation” because it better captures the deliberate nature of the destruction of our energy supply by the Left.

    What do you think?

    102

  • #
    Honk R Smith

    The scheme is in the process of collapsing.
    The schemers will retire to their estates.
    Those fooled will be slow to realize they’ve been fooled.
    The slowness of that process will be the primary defense of those estates.

    112

    • #
      crakar24

      Yes honk the plan is working beautifully and all they needed to do was get rid of the one man standing in their way.

      Unleaded is 2.25 per litre in Adelaide today that’s with the 22 cent reduction in excise, my power costs just went up by 4 cents a kWh.

      Food costs are going through the roof, this has all been planned with a pinch of political ineptitude

      81

      • #

        Canberra is usually a leader of petrol price but I just bought at $1.98 (91). Maybe it was old stock?

        Average Canberra electricity bill is going down for next 12 months. I wonder why?

        14

        • #
          Serp

          Sorry Gee Aye but my eyes glazed over and I was unable to complete reading your link. Perhaps you could supply a paraphrase.

          41

        • #
          crakar24

          After all these years I still don’t know if you understand the concepts of which you talk about.

          Canberra will have cheaper power because they signed a fixed term contract, not because the cost if generation is cheap.

          If there is not enough power to supply Canberra then Canberra will run out of power not matter what the contract says.

          71

          • #

            It is a renewed fixed term contract that took into account the current situation and the investments of the act government. It is not a lucky futures bet from years ago.

            Did you miss this

            ACT Government scheme costs decreased because of a fall in the large-scale feed-in-tariff (FiT) support payments. Large-scale FiT support payment is the difference between the fixed contract price to renewable generators and the prevailing wholesale electricity prices,

            15

            • #
              crakar24

              No i did not miss that, something else i did not miss is if Canberra had any need for gas then they would pay full price like every else in the country (not WA) just like they are not shielded from increase in fuel/food prices etc once again i dont know if you really understand the concepts here.

              30

    • #
      David Maddison

      Those fooled will be slow to realize they’ve been fooled.

      I have no plans to forgive or forget those fooled, being the slave army of the useful idiots of the Left.

      Why?

      Because ignorance is a choice. They choose to be ignorant and they must bear the consequences.

      Choosing to be ignorant is like choosing to drink and drive. You are 100% liable if you kill someone drinking and driving because you chose to drink. Similarly for choosing to be ignorant.

      “We didn’t know.” EXCUSE NOT ACCEPTED!

      92

      • #
        Neville

        I completely agree DM but how do we get our blog donkeys to wake up and understand very simple sums?
        Or the clueless Teals or the Labor/Greens or the Coalition or the MSM or Business groups or the Banks or so many other ignorant fools that should know better?
        Yet none of the UN data is difficult to find or understand after only a few minutes of searching online.
        But somehow the so called scientists and all of the above can’t understand these very simple sums after 30 years? Can anyone not understand our frustration?

        72

        • #
          Mark Allinson

          “Can anyone not understand our frustration?”

          Part of your frustration derives from your lack of understanding that intentionally destructive climate policy is not a product of a lack of understanding.

          There is no chance of successfully reasoning someone out of a position they never arrived at through reason.

          61

  • #
    John Connor II

    Spain causing global warming

    In 2015, four State Meteorological Agency whistleblowers announced via the European Parliament that planes were regularly spraying throughout Spain:

    “On May 19, 2015, MEP Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE) announced in the European Parliament that four workers from the State Meteorological Agency had confessed that Spain is being sprayed entirely from planes that spread lead dioxide through the atmosphere, silver iodide and diatomite. The objective, according to the same MEP, would be to ward off the rains and allow temperatures to rise, which creates a summery climatic environment for tourism and, at the same time, helps corporations in the agricultural sector. This, in turn, is producing cold drops of great intensity.”

    https://newspunch.com/spain-admits-spraying-chemtrails-on-citizens-to-fight-covid-19/

    Saving the planet the capitalist way…

    11

  • #
    the sting

    If man is not causing global warming , man cannot fix it .

    91

    • #
      b.nice

      In reality, there is absolutely nothing that needs “fixing”

      There has been a slight but highly beneficial rise in temperature since the coldest period in some 10,000 years.

      Be very glad of that.

      80

      • #
        the sting

        I agree there is nothing to fix . We have to convince those that do believe there is . Not an easy task .

        20

      • #
        Philip

        That is the bottom line – everything is absolutely fine, no fix needed.

        40

  • #
    Peter Lang

    Nuclear power is the way to go, not renewables

    1. Renewables are expensive, unreliable, short life

    Renewables (solar, wind, hydro, biomass, etc.) are hugely expensive, unreliable and have short operating lives (e.g. 15 to 30 years). And they require huge energy storage capacity.

    The disposal costs for solar panels and wind turbines are very high, adding to the cost of the electricity they generate.

    The transmission costs are huge because the transmission line to each renewable plant must be sized to carry the full output of each plant but, on average, transmit only 15% to 35% of the output capacity of solar and wind plants.

    Also, the transmission lines must be very long because the renewable plants are widely dispersed in country areas away from where the power is used. The transmission lines need to run to energy storage sites (pumped hydro and batteries) and from the energy storage sites to the areas where the power is required.

    The transmission system will become increasingly vulnerable to disruption by foreign powers. The economic cost of disruption can be huge as it disrupts manufacturing and transport.

    Furthermore, wind energy:
    • is almost always a net economic liability to host communities,
    • has many proven problematic environmental consequences,
    • can cause well-documented adverse human health impacts, and

    2. Nuclear power is safest and cheapest

    Nuclear power is the safest and can become the cheapest way to supply power as:

    • The enormous regulatory impediments that are making them so costly to build are removed;

    • Small modular reactors (SMR) are built in factories, shipped to site and installed rapidly;

    • Their costs come down as more and more are built on production lines in factories, and they are improved and their production and construction costs come down;

    • They can operate for up to 60 to 80 years, thus greatly reducing the cost of replacements;

    • Transmission costs can be greatly reduced over time as smaller reactors replace large ones and they are installed close to demand centres; and, eventually, as micro reactors replace SMRs. Micro reactors can be sized for industrial estates, commercial properties, shopping centres, apartment complexes, and eventually for individual residential properties, thus greatly reducing the size of and, eventually, the need for an electricity grid.

    70

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Meanwhile, back in real Australia, the monthly UAH satellite temperatures for the lower troposphere above our land have been released for May 2022.
    Using the Monckton method of analysis, we now have no positive warming trend for the last 9 years and 10 months. Or 118 months, going back to August 2012.
    On present trends, we will have had a ten year pause in a few weeks.
    What global warming here?
    Ask it of all and sundry as often as you can.
    No Aussie warming for the last 10 years.
    What global warming here?
    Should we plan a mass publicity event for August 2022? Geoff S

    30

  • #

    […] The Climate War will never be the same: it was a lame Cold War substitute until real War returned […]

    00