…
|
|
||||
|
This is not just an economic war, this is a big wet blanket on some kinds of scientific research. With one big bad player in the game breaking the rules, there is less incentive for people to announce and share discoveries. Royalties can’t be enforced, and a competitor might copy and compete against you. Are we entering a new era cold war of secrecy? Back to Zang: Now that there is no need to hide the theft, nor pander in the hope of taking more, another Chinese Professor openly bragged about the situation last week: China ‘Copied Its Way’ to Economic Success, Chinese Professor BoastsNicole Hao and Cathy He, Epoch Times For the past 40 years, the Chinese regime only did one thing: plagiarize, Zang Qichao, a prominent marketing expert and visiting professor of Beijing’s Tsinghua University, told a group of Chinese entrepreneurs recently. “We plagiarized wildly, copied wildly,” Zang said. “What intellectual property rights? What patented technology? We’ll get it first and deal with it later.” Through this approach, China has skyrocketed to become one of the world’s leading economies, and now finds that there’s nothing left to replicate, Zang said. For years, the CCP told businesses they would get access to the vast Chinese market if they worked with local firms. This arrangement meant Chinese staff soon learnt how everything worked, then gradually replaced the foreigners. “When we look back, the factories are ours, the equipment is ours, the technology is ours, the patents are ours,” Zang said. “The foreigners have all gone.”
Feel the hostility — the complete lack of respect or shred of any gratitude. Where are the squad of progressive Sino activists lecturing Zang for his racist hate? The CCP plagiarized many things, but they didn’t copy that. The West hoped China would develop like Japan. The good people of China probably hoped that too. The more Woke the West gets, the more it sleeps at the wheel. ______________ The Epoch Times also tells us that former President Donald Trump, launched a new website this week. The Antiracist educators are at it again, creating racism everywhere they go:
Here’s a case of soft racism disguised as a righteous lecture (and a call for funding) Profs help push program that claims math is ‘racist’ because it requires a ‘right answer’Wyatt Eichholz, CampusReform A new program promoted by the Oregon Department of Education is designed to “dismantle” instances of “white supremacy culture in the mathematics classroom.” Calling all victims! (And if you aren’t one now, you will be soon.) “White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions,” the guide states. “Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics.” From the headline, this new “maths” has all the racist underpinnings of a gloriously oppressive education — one that tells students that maths is really a “white” thing. It’s implicit in the mission statement that those with a colored complexion probably won’t be good at maths and furthermore, that they can blame white supremacists for that. It’s almost like someone was working to make it harder for black mathematicans to believe in themselves, and white mathematicians too. For starters, it has people thinking about their skin color and not the numbers.  … Lordy! Imagine having to show your work? Examples of “white supremacy culture” cited by the document include a focus on “getting the ‘right’ answer” and requiring students to show their work. It is as bad as you thought. The authors of the program state that “The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so. Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict.” Whatever you do, don’t perpetuate objectivity. The document is truly a powerhouse of hate: …
How many young impressionable student teachers would come out of this training feeling more empowered, more able, and more enthusiastic about teaching maths? White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions. Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics.The table below identifies the ways in which white supremacy shows up in math classrooms. Have you harmed anyone today by talking about maths? Speaking of Toxic cultures, read what happens to Falun Gung practitioners in China. That’s “Toxic”
h/t Steve H March 31st, 2021 | Tags: Education, Maths, Rascism | Category: Big-Government, Ideology, School |  Print This Post | | … How many Australian houses are covered in the trappings of slave labor? The EU has discovered some ethical rats inhabit their roofs.  … Tim Blair spots some turbo-powered hypocrisy among those that normally lecture the rest of us on ethical consumerism. Solar: Slavery Sourced, Green Endorsed, Tax SubsidisedEthically-sourced food, clothing, coffee and even magical healing crystals are a big draw to concerned green types, who profess to worry deeply about the origin of anything they buy. But the same types aren’t too fussed over the origins of their holy solar panels. Indeed. Awkward news came out last month that “Nearly every solar power panel sold in the European Union has its origins in China’s oppressed Xinjiang region.” Fears over China’s Muslim forced labor loom over EU solar powerPolitico Solar power uses slaves from every sideEastern slaves make the panels, and western slaves pay to subsidize other people’s solar panels. If only solar power was competitive — we could afford to pay real workers in real factories, and say No thanks to subsidies — and still get cheap electricity at the end of it. Paul Homewood points out that the top ten solar panel makers are corporations in China, China, China, Canada, China, China, China, US, Germany and Taiwan. Even Canadian manufacturing relies on plants in Asia or Latin America and Panasonic has abandoned it’s solar factories in Malaysia and Japan. Who can compete with forced labor?  Statista h/t Paul Homewood, Notalotofpeopleknowthat Homewood sums up the Catch-22: Naturally, potential solar panel manufacturers in Europe would like to see punitive tariffs, but this would drastically impact on costs, destroying the idea that solar power is competitive. My guess is that, despite protests from MEPs, little will change, and a blind eye will be turned just as with the new Russian gas pipeline to Germany. And all for what? Solar power in the EU only accounts for 1.8% of primary energy consumption. Greenpeace says Climate Change is a Human Rights issue right up until it isn’t. It’s really an economic issue isn’t it? More money for Greens and their friends.
March 30th, 2021 | Tags: China, Solar Energy (PV) | Category: China, Global Warming, Solar Power | Print This Post | | What kind of free speech is always and only “respectful”? Whatever the VC wants. Peter Ridd has pointed out that Sydney Uni is trying to weasel its way around the new Freedom of Speech bill by declaring its undying support for free speech as long as it is respectful. So you can say anything you like as long as you don’t offend the VC. If an academic spots potential fraud, malpractice or corruption, they’ll have to find an inoffensive way to say it. How do you say “incompetent crook” politely? This is a university which nurtured a play called “Kill Climate Deniers”. Sydney Uni has no respect for at least half of the tax payers who fund it. So I say fine, as long as Sydney Uni has the power to sack people that offend it, let the taxpayers have the right to sack Sydney University. Until then, free speech is free speech. The strategy of using vague, indeterminate language like “respect” is straight out of the communist party playbook — keep ’em guessing and they shalt censor themselves. All universities that don’t know what “Free Speech” is should henceforth raise their funding direct from the people who are willing to pay for Autocratic, Politically Correct Research. All the rest of us want real research. The University of Cincinnati has all but sacked a professsor who used the term “chinese virus” in an email. In many respects, unis will smother academic freedomKeep reading → … Tucker Carlson: Late-night Comedy died during Trump’s Presidency. Adam Carolla: ” You know they’ve got to everybody when they’ve got to comedians. Think about that, Professors, cops and politicans — they caved. Now the fact that comedians have caved means everyone is scared of the Woke Mob. “ UPDATE: Youtubes gone, so Bitchute whole Episode here. Mark Steyn does some parody at 11 mins. The discussion of the Death of Comedy starts at 27 mins. 25 March 2021 But comedy is not complete dead on late night cable: check Mark Steyn — especially on the fawning slavish American Media: Biden said we have to raise every road 3 feet because of climate change, … and they took that, these people, the Court Enuchs went along with it… Mark Steyn on Joe Biden declaring he might run for another term: … I have no idea who the government of the United States is, but if the Deep State can get away with this, they can get away with anything. The Deep State are saying, if we can pull this off, we don’t need anyone in the Oval Office.
Matt Taibbi: The Death of HumorReview of “Killer Cartoons,” edited by David Wallis, and “White,” by Bret Easton Ellis Humor is dying all over, for obvious reasons. All comedy is subversive and authoritarianism is the fashion. Comics exist to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously, and we live in an age when people believe they have a constitutional right to be taken seriously, even if — especially if — they’re idiots, repeating thoughts they only just heard for the first time minutes ago. Because humor deflates stupid ideas, humorists are denounced in all cultures that worship stupid ideas, like Spain under the Inquisition, Afghanistan under the Taliban, or today’s United States. A lot of the anti-Trump cartoons were neither all that creative nor funny — if “He’s gay and has a little dick!” is the best you can do with that politician, you probably need a new line of work … March 27th, 2021 | Tags: Carlson (Tucker), Satire & Parody | Category: Global Warming, Satire & Parody | Print This Post | | The latest academic voodoo doll tossed at Fossil Fuels is a study claiming that the industry gets $65 billion in “implicit” subsidies in the US. The authors of the latest paper assume the broken climate models work, and then guesstimate what the cost of all that theoretical warming would be with economic models that aren’t much better. It’s a paywalled paper, but they don’t appear to account for all the net benefits of coal, oil and gas which include, keeping people alive and fertilizing forests and fields around the world for free. These aren’t guesstimates from the future but known good and great gifts from the last century or two.  Greening the Earth. Zaichun Zhu, (2016) Send them the bill: the fossil fuel companies are subsidizing taxpayersHow much is a hundred years of free fertilizer worth? If only academic institutions were more than Big Gov advertising agencies they might also have considered that fossil fuel companies are never paid for their part in boosting agricultural yields, nor in greening the forests. Some 18 million square kilometers of Earths surface has more biomass. Arid regions of the world are 11% greener, mostly thanks to CO2 and deserts are shrinking. If CO2 actually caused much warming we might even be overrun with cheap soy and corn and crops could grow another 1,200 kilometers closer to the North Pole. Cold weather kills 20 times more people than heat. If Kotchen can assume CO2 causes warming (despite the lack of evidence for that), it follows then that it must have saved countless lives. How many more senior citizens would die prematurely if they are forced to pay more for electricity and thus can’t afford to turn the heater on in winter? In the UK alone, in one winter there were at least 20,000 more deaths. All over the world, people die more in cooler weather, even in hot Brisbane. Fossil fuels makes farmers richer, food more affordable, keeps people warm, greens the planet, employs thousands, pays taxes, saves forests from being razed for Drax, moves nearly everything that needs to move, and creates more flowers. In a fair world, Yale should give back all government funding until it raises its standards and stops producing politically biased, incompetent studies. The producer benefits of implicit fossil fuel subsidies in the United StatesMatthew J. Kotchen, PNAS There are real and substantial financial implications to fossil fuel producers of policies that seek to correct market failures brought about by climate change, adverse health effects from local pollution, and inefficient transportation. The producer benefits of the existing policy regime in the United States are estimated at $62 billion annually during normal economic conditions. This translates into large amounts for individual companies due to the relatively small number of fossil fuel producers. This paper provides company-specific estimates, and these numbers clarify why many in the fossil fuel industry oppose more efficient regulatory reform; they may also shape the way policymakers view the prospects for additional subsidies going forward. “The financial benefit because of unpriced costs borne by society is comparable to 18% of net income from continuing domestic operations for the median natural gas and oil producer in 2017–2018, and it exceeds net income for the majority of coal producers. “ And yet the companies themselves don’t even try to defend what they do? Why? Kotchen notes that he contacted all of the companies included in his study and found that none of them had anything to say about implicit subsidies. See the chart of how desperate plants are for carbon dioxide. The fertilizer carefully released to the world by the gas oil and coal industries is a gift to farmers and consumers, keeping the price of pumpkins low. REFERENCE Zaichun Zhu, et al (2016) Greening of the Earth and its drivers, Nature Climate Change, Letter, doi:10.1038/nclimate3004 March 26th, 2021 | Tags: Fossil Fuel, Subsidies | Category: Economics, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, USA | Print This Post | | ,,, The purpose of the hot air balloon adding two whole kilograms of chalk to the atmosphere is a glorious multipurpose marketing exercise. It might as well be a skywriting advert. Building a sunshade for the whole planet radiates cinematic desperation — it’s advertising the terror of climate change — Really, we need to do that? It’ll get everyone talking about climate change for another five minutes, as if it mattered. But make no mistake, it’s such an ambitious Manhattan-scale idea, it’s advertising Bill Gates the billionaire, too. This is meant to raise his global cachet too. Super-Bill to the rescue. Is he God? But it’s also advertising other things, like how stupid the climate models are, how fake the pious planetary-care is, and how daft the whole UN-herd is. Bill Gates plans to launch a bag of chalk into the stratosphere and somehow get useful data out of it about whether we could build an Earthly sunshade to cool ourselves on the same scale as a super volcano. ( To that end, if it looked like he might succeed, watch the Paris agreement dissolve a nanosecond after someone starts to get serious about shading one nation and not some other one.)  Dumping 2kg of advertising into the global media. So straight off some of the Ecoworriers panic that this is a terrifying experiment — not because Bill Gates is recklessly endangering the climate — but because, if this works, it ” will be used by politicians as a justification to postpone reducing greenhouse gas emissions.” Lordy! Imagine the disaster if the planet cooled, and the Green movement got what it wanted without the hair shirts? What really matters to them, reducing CO2 or getting people to stop driving and clogging up their roads? Indeed, not having to bankrupt all the fossil fuel corporations? I mean really!? It’s worse than that– the Deplorables would get hooked on pumping up the white skies, addicted to chalk to cover up for all their sins! ‘It would cool the planet by reflecting solar radiation but once you’re on to that, it’s like taking heroin — you’ve got to carry on doing the drug to keep on having the effect,’ he said. He explained that without tackling pollution first we would have to keep lifting more and more dust into the stratosphere, which would change the daytime sky to white and if it ever stopped there would be a rise in global temperatures again. Recklessly fiddling with the climate to save us from reckless fiddling.Apparently the same models that have all the answers now, are pretty useless at predicting what happens when one aerosol changes. Climatologists are also concerned that such tinkering could unintentionally disrupt the circulation of ocean currents that regulate our weather. This itself could unleash a global outbreak of extreme climatic events that might devastate farmland, wipe out entire species and foster disease epidemics. Which begs the question — some models are happy to say exactly what will happen if we reduce CO2, but those same models apparently don’t work at all on aerosols. Scientists may be able to set the perfect climatic conditions for farmers in America’s vast Midwest, but at the same time this setting might wreak drought havoc across Africa. For it is not possible to change the temperature in one part of the world and not disturb the rest. Everything in the world’s climate is interconnected. Furthermore, any change in global average temperature would in turn change the way in which heat is distributed around the globe, with some places warming more than others. This, in turn, would affect rain levels. Heat drives the water cycle — in which water evaporates, forms clouds and drops as rain. Any heat alteration would cause an accompanying shift in rainfall patterns. But how and where exactly? There is no way of predicting how the world’s long-term weather may respond to having a gigantic chemical sunshade plonked on top of it. No way of predicting long term weather indeed. Someone tell the modelers. Imagine if the world was going to cool in the next 50 years but all the models said it was warming so geniuses put up a sunscreen and made the cooling worse? What if a Krakatoa goes off the week after the dust is released? Someone will have to design a nuclear-powered flying vacuum-cleaner before the next ice age hits. h/t Colin, and Kathleen. March 25th, 2021 | Tags: Aerosols, Gates (Bill), Geoengineering | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | So the worlds car manufacturers are lining up: The Volkswagon group and GM are going “full electric” — so they say. Ford Motor Co claims its line-up in Europe will be fully electric by 2030, while Tata Motors unit Jaguar Land Rover said its luxury Jaguar brand will be entirely electric by 2025. But Toyota and Honda are not. At least investors (and consumers) have a choice. Presumably , the US Democrats will want to change that. Toyota Warns (Again) About Electrifying All Autos. Is Anyone Listening?Bryan Preston, PJ Media When Toyota offers an opinion on the car market, it’s probably worth listening to. This week, Toyota reiterated an opinion it has offered before. That opinion is straightforward: The world is not yet ready to support a fully electric auto fleet. Toyota’s head of energy and environmental research Robert Wimmer testified before the Senate this week, and said: “If we are to make dramatic progress in electrification, it will require overcoming tremendous challenges, including refueling infrastructure, battery availability, consumer acceptance, and affordability.” Of those, “Consumer Acceptance” is the easiest thing to change (especially with a law and the right amount of jail time). But last time we looked, a quarter of UK drivers wouldn’t even buy an Electric car “in their lifetimes”. Only 1 in 50 US cars are electric:Toyota warns that the grid and infrastructure simply aren’t there to support the electrification of the private car fleet. A 2017 U.S. government study found that we would need about 8,500 strategically-placed charge stations to support a fleet of just 7 million electric cars. That’s about six times the current number of electric cars but no one is talking about supporting just 7 million cars. We should be talking about powering about 300 million within the next 20 years, if all manufacturers follow GM and stop making ICE cars. The scale of the switch hasn’t even been introduced into the conversation in any systematic way yet. According to FinancesOnline, there are 289.5 million cars just on U.S. roads as of 2021. About 98 percent of them are gas-powered. Toyota’s RAV4 took the top spot for purchases in the U.S. market in 2019, with Honda’s CR-V in second. GM’s top seller, the Chevy Equinox, comes in at #4 behind the Nissan Rogue. This is in the U.S. market, mind. GM only has one entry in the top 15 in the U.S. Toyota and Honda dominate, with a handful each in the top 15. California and Texas don’t have grids big enough to deal with houses…
h/t Marvin W, Jim Simpson,
Bjorn Lomborg was going to present some economic pointers to Duke University last week, but even UN approved estimates were too high-risk for Duke . Evidently the students are so poorly trained they couldn’t be trusted around a different point of view. Lomborg might seed all kinds of wicked ideas about them doing their own research. Though, more likely, it had nothing to do with the students. The real problem with Lomborg was that he threatened their branding. What if Duke lost some big lefty donors? (Or the biggest donor of all, Big Government?) Lomborg shows how fragile the UN-Wall of Science is All he aimed to do was to join together two separate UN economic factoids, but he had to be axed. He even agrees “climate change is a problem”. But agreeing on the science is not enough. When climate alarmism meets cancel cultureBjorn Lomborg, The Australian … One of my [axed] presentation points was highlighting the latest full UN Climate Panel report which estimates the total cost of climate change. They found that unmitigated climate change in half a century will reduce general welfare equivalent to lowering each person’s income by between 0.2 and 2 per cent. Given that the UN expects each person on the planet to be much better off – 363 per cent as wealthy as today – climate might cause us to only be 356 per cent as rich by then. That is a problem, but certainly not the end of the world. Except it’s not a problem, just an error bar. With blind economic models piled on broken climate models, fifty years from now the world might well be cooler, and poorer too. But Lomborg’s point is still potent. The UN are complete hypocrites and troughers. Keep reading → … Carbon dioxide radically lower but floods destroy houses, cover beaches in debris across NSW in 1857Floods are sweeping across NSW and 18,000 people have been evacuated, and rain is forecast to keep coming for til Wednesday. Flooding is described as the worst in 60 years. But that’s the point. There have always been floods right after droughts and fires — and we knew that 150 years ago. The scandal is that in 1865, scientists had a better grip on what caused them. Today “top” climate scientists think your car causes the weather. Top science in 2021: Solar panels and windmills could have stopped the flooding: The multiple natural disasters Australia has experienced over the past 18 months — such as the floods currently ravaging NSW — should be blamed on climate change, say experts from the Climate Council. “The intense rainfall and floods that have devastated NSW communities are taking place in an atmosphere made warmer and wetter by climate change, which is driven by the burning of coal, oil, and gas,” Climate Council spokesperson Will Steffen said in a statement on Monday. “For many communities dealing with floods right now, this is the latest in a line of climate change-exacerbated extreme weather events they have faced, including drought, the Black Summer bushfires, and scorching heatwaves,” he added. The more money we put into government funded science the more it looks like witchcraftDoes CO2 cause floods? It takes 3 minutes in the historic Trove archives to test this theory. In a surprise to Supermodels everywhere, getting CO2 back to 310ppm (even if it were possible) would return Australia to 1950, so we already know how this works out. There were a spate of floods in Eastern Australia in the 1950’s and 1960s when La Nina’s were more common and the world was cooling. For example, in 1949 8 people were killed and 20,000 were left homeless in New South Wales by flooding. The Adelaide Chronicle June 23, 1949  … In Maitland in 1955, 25 people died, 2,000 homes were inundated and 58 homes washed away. This was only three years after the previous floods when The Hume Highway at Camden was under 30 feet of water. NEWSFLASH: There were floods in New South Wales in 1857 even before coal fired power was inventedA quarter century before the first coal power plant was built anywhere in the world, devastating floods washed over New South Wales. There were three separate floods in 1857, “each worse than the one before”. The floods and storms were described as afflicting an area from far north of Taree down to Goulburn.
 Hunter River Floods, 1857 “Five years of firewood” washed up: What amount of property was destroyed by the flood it is impossible to ascertain. The piles of wood, which of themselves would supply the inhabitants of both East and West Maitland with firewood for the next five years, have buried in, without doubt, some hundreds of pounds’ worth of property. Many families are left entirely destitute of food and raiment. It is impossible to give an accurate description of this desolate scene. On the Hawkesbury “Windsor was almost an island, there was no escape by dry land.” In Mudgee, the “consequences were most disastrous “. .. the rain fell in torrents… ” “Other floods occurred at Penrith, Camden, Gouldburn and Cassilis.” Read the story of boats trapped for days, including one “small trusty craft” that was “driven off course by the violence of the tempest some thousand miles” and out of sight of land for ten days, while the people survived on biscuits. The beaches were covered to “an incredible height with the trophies of some devastating flood…” the debris included the sides and roofs of houses, furniture, cabbages, pumpkins, goats and pigs. Mail was stopped, and at least three boats were seen wrecked.
 Part a Floods, NSW, September 10th, 1857, Manning River, Trove, NSW. Sydney Morning Herald| Click to enlarge.  Part b. Floods, NSW, September 10th, 1857, Manning River, Trove, NSW. Sydney Morning Herald| Click to enlarge. In 2021, among other things, cows are even being rescued from the surf on beaches, which probably makes them a lot luckier than the ones that got washed downriver in 1857. Thoughts and best wishes for everyone caught in this natural disaster. March 22nd, 2021 | Tags: Floods, NSW (New South Wales) | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | The Chinese government understands the weakness of the West where national self hate has become a spectator sport. When the US Government attacks the CCP for human rights abuses, the CCP just use all the Democrats own talking points right back at them and the Democrats can hardly disagree: Tucker Carlson: Even the Chinese know America won’t survive with ‘woke’ liberals in chargeHere, for starters, is the Chinese government’s assessment of our democracy: YANG JIECHI [TRANSLATION]: Many people within the United States actually have little confidence in the democracy of the United States, and they have various views regarding the government of the United States. Many Americans don’t have confidence in their own democracy, he said. In other words, maybe the last presidential election was fraudulent. Suddenly China’s top diplomat sounded a lot like one of those right-wing White supremacist insurrectionists you’re always hearing about on CNN, the ones the Biden Justice Department has put in prison. Tucker Carlson explains the Mandarin word “Baizuo” means a white liberal (in the wokest possible way): The Chinese know our leaders well. In fact, they have a name for our self-hating professional class. They call them “baizuo.” The rough translation from Mandarin is “White liberal,” and it is definitely not a compliment. Chinese state media describes baizou as people who, “only care about topics such as immigration, minorities, LGBT and the environment, who have no sense of real problems in the real world, who only advocate for peace and equality to satisfy their own feelings of moral superiority, and who are so obsessed with political correctness that they tolerate backward Islamic values for the sake of multiculturalism.“ As Chinese state media notes, “former US [sic] President Obama was considered an advocate of baizuo ideology.” So is “German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her decision to welcome more than one million third-world [sic] immigrants to Europe.” Other observations about baizuo, as reported by Chinese state media, include the fact that they “advocate inclusiveness and anti-discrimination but cannot tolerate different opinions.” Baizuo’s political opinions are “so shallow that they tend to maintain social equality by embracing ideologies that run against the basic concept of equality.” According to one scholar from Peking University, “baizuo are phony and hypocritical and will make the situation in the West go from bad to worse.” And so on. And so, a communist superpower that harvests organs from political prisoners can silence opponents by repeating their own self indulgent attention seeking critics. And the so called “Leaders” of the most powerful nation on Earth can’t even defend themselves. What would Kamala Harris say — “We are the house of horrible haters. You’re so right?” h/t Bill AZ and David. March 21st, 2021 | Tags: China, Political Correctness, USA, Woke | Category: China, Politics, USA, Woke | Print This Post | | …
Yesterdays free advertisement for the Renewables Industry comes from Peter Martin, ANU, and was swallowed whole by The Conversation, and then repeated by The ABC. (If only the ABC had three million dollars a day to spend on checking things before it published them, they might have warned the economist that he doesn’t understand much about the grid or even the energy market.)
This kind of anti-coal PsyOps might work on teenagers:
Yallourn, in the Latrobe Valley, provides up to 20 per cent of Victoria’s power. It has been operating for 47 years. Since late 2017 at least one of its four units has broken down 50 times. Its workforce doubles for three to four months most years to deal with the breakdowns. It pumps out 3 per cent of Australia’s carbon emissions. And here’s Macarthur Wind Power plant, Victoria’s largest at 420-never-attained-MW. It breaks down nearly every single day:
 Fig 1: Anero.id Macarthur Wind output Martin goes on in a non-stop infomercial for wind and solarHe must be aiming for 12 year old voters, or perhaps dogs and cats, with genius comments like this:
Nationwide, wind and solar including rooftop solar supplies 20% of our needs. It turns on and off at will.
Even 12 year olds know he can’t turn on the sun and wind. Though the AEMO appear to be happy about this level of national debate, as do The Conversation and the ABC editors. Perhaps it’s worth asking if they even read what they publish?
As for his understanding of maintenance: coal plants can be continuously refurbished. If one turbine at Yallorn isn’t being maintained properly perhaps that’s got something to do with the forced transition to random generators which strips profits from reliable power? Maybe ramping up and down this generational infrastructure “with the wind” costs more to maintain?
The bottom line:After closing two coal plants then spending four years installing renewables at world record levels, for one whole quarter, South Australian retailers have finally paid lower wholesale rates than QLD and NSW. Proving that if you take a jagged line and draw a line to a cherry picked point you can find any kind of trend you want.
Coal-fired plants close, then prices fall
Before Northern closed, South Australia had Australia’s highest price. Five years after the closure of Northern in 2016, and four years after the closure of Hazelwood in 2017, South Australia and Victorian have wholesale prices one-third lower than those in NSW and two-fifths lower than those in Queensland.
Something happened after the closure (largely as a result of the closure) that forced prices down. South Australia became a renewables powerhouse.
“Something happened”? Something indeed. Wholesale rates fell from a crisis peak, while retail prices and other costs rose (like storage, stability, and emergency control). What matters is the total cost and South Australians on average, pay 33 cents per kilowatt hour, nearly 60 percent more than people in Queensland. The closure of coal plants doesn’t cause a renewables boom, only Big Government junk subsidies can do that for junk generators.
And the closure of coal plants doesn’t cause prices to fall either. More coal means cheaper electricity. Fig 2. SA consumer still pay more. None of our grid now is as cheap as it was for years before renewables were added to the system
Peter Martin has cherry picked with a surgical scalpel. The last quarter, where South Australia was finally cheaper (on wholesale rates) than NSW and Qld, was the first time this has happened in eight years. For the last four years during the rapid rise of renewables, the cheapest electricity comes from the black coal state of Queensland.
 Fig 3: All those renewables, and yet prices are still not as low as what they were when we didn’t have them. South Australia might be a renewables superstar but guess where their cheapest reliable power comes from … black coalThe only thing cheaper than black coal is brown coal. Most of the hours of the day the price in South Australia is not being set by solar or wind power. SA system costs keep rising Another record! South Australia had to spend $15 million last quarter on “system security directions”. The AEMO were very busy ordering the Gas Powered generators (GPG) to stay on. In 2020, total costs for directing South Australian generators for system strength was $49 million (or  Fig 5: The AEMO has to manage the system, and the costs of keeping back up on standby are rising.
NSW prices spiked because 3,000 MW of coal power was out of action (mostly planned maintenance)The spike in NSW electricity prices that Martin builds his case on, was minor and temporary. According to the AEMO Quarterly report, the wholesale costs went up in NSW last quarter because it was the quietest quarter of the year, and plant managers decided to catch up on maintenance (see figure 6). Up to 3,000 MW of its black coal generators were offline. Thus, it follows, if they had more coal they would have been even cheaper than SA and Vic. Doesn’t fit the narrative…
It also follows that the AEMO knows Peter Martin is wrong. When will they speak up and serve the public that pay them?
Why is that left to unpaid bloggers?
 Figure 6. Look which state turned of it’s cheap black coal supplies last quarter for planned maintenance. More solar PV is the system vandal that makes coal power more expensive… Critics may argue that Solar PV on rooftops doesn’t bid, but “sets” the price by reducing demand. But renewables and coal are not swappable services. Being cheaper at noon can mean being more expensive at most other hours of the day. Random “free energy”, just steals profits from coal, makes a whole lot of infrastructure and staff sit around doing nothing on a long lunch, and run less efficiently when it tries to fill in for the energy vandal forced on the system. When the sun goes down the whole solar team and capital sit around powering nothing too. Coal plus solar can not possibly be cheaper than coal alone. It takes more people, more capital, more land, more maintenance. In the hours solar runs, all the useful coal infrastructure has to still be there, waiting to step in. The only cost “savings” to the large coal plants is a few truckloads of coal. All the other costs are the same or higher. The solar electrons are simply surplus random supply that “is the part of the jigsaw that doesn’t fit in” (to use Peter Martin’s words). Coal also used to provide all that frequency stability we need for free and on call 24/7 and then feed our crops free fertilizer as an unlisted bonus. How to create market chaos and a price spikeAfter Hazelwood shut in 2017, the cheapest form of electricity (brown coal) suddenly couldn’t supply enough electricity to set the final price of supply very often. That’s why the system price leapt. Hazelwood was in Victoria but the effect can even be seen in South Australia in Figure 3 above, where brown coal stops setting the price as often from Q2 onwards in 2017. That was “the Hazelwood effect”. Brown coal fired generators are still sometimes setting the final winning bids at under $10/MWh. Its unbelievably, unbeatably cheap. No wonder all the junk expensive system vandals want to close brown coal stations. The screwed market — a world of negative pricesThe low quarterly prices in South Australia were partly due to negative prices, which “cut South Australia’s average by $8.7/MWh.” This is a graph below of the main fuels setting wholesale prices in South Australia. The brown coal average winning bids are so low they are hard to see. Gas power and hydropower are obviously setting higher prices. The black coal winning bids have settled now in the new post Hazelwood bountiful world of renewables, at a higher price than they were. Genius.  Fig 7: Some fuel sources set the price all the other fuels earn. Lower bars mean cheaper winning bids. Black coal wins bids at higher costs now that cheap brown coal plants closed and renewables have been added. | Click to enlarge. But sometimes solar and wind power win bids too. Have a look at what happens to this same graph when their winning bids are added in (below). The effect of the large deeply negative bids changes the scale of the graph and pretty much defies any sense at all. Why would anyone pay money to provide electricity? In a normal market we only pay people to take away rubbish. Is this craziness entirely a product of the subsidies? Is that what makes it possible to bid so deeply negative and “still make a profit” or are some of the players trying to game the system but losing?  Fig 8: The Negative price bids are all thanks to solar and wind power and are “off the chart”. | Click to wallow in a fake market.
On the NEM, suppliers bid in the hope that someone bidding a lot higher than them wins the last successful ticket in the stack. Then all successful bidders all get paid at that same top winning rate. Obviously, generators don’t want to bid too high, or they earn nothing at all. But the race to the bottom seems kinda odd (to say the least). If they win at minus $1,000/MWhr, then they have to supply the electricity AND pay til it burns for it too. In the end, if the negative bids reduced the wholesale price of electricity by $8/MWh but that’s only due to subsidies, it’s not a savings at all, it’s just a redistribution. Someone else had to pay. It’s false advertising yet again. The AEMO report remarks on the record amount of negative prices in Q4 last year. 1.3.3 Negative wholesale electricity prices Despite the record occurrence of negative spot prices, the impact on the quarterly average prices was limited. Peter Martin — economist of some sort, thinks negative pricing means being paid to “turn off”. His junk commentary is “not even wrong” but for 17 years he was the ABC’s economics correspondent. He is so wrong he was awarded an Member of the Order of Australia (AM). Flinders uni taught him economics. They have a lot to answer for. Peter Martin says: Being even cheaper than the power produced by the old brown-coal-fired power stations, there is at times so much it that it sends prices negative, meaning generators get paid to turn off in order to avoid putting more power into the system than users can take out. It’s one of the reasons coal-fired plants are closing: they are hard to turn off. They are just as hard to turn on, and pretty hard to turn up. He is making mistakes piled on mistakes. Firstly he’s confusing negative prices with something called “Demand management”. Secondly he thinks the new random and volatile grid is progress instead of being an unnatural artificial forced transition that no one needed to have but we were all coerced into paying for. In the new vandalized grid, no one wants to put money into coal maintenance. Plus the companies that own coal own the unreliables. What could possibly go wrong? And who said the ABC doesn’t have advertising? It has the worst kind — the sort dressed up as “reporting” and funded –mostly — through taxpayer dollars. Pace Viv Forbes. Carbon Sense who said this earlier this week.
There are zero comments on this article at The Conversation. And presumably comments will be closed five minutes after I publish this.
Keep reading → March 19th, 2021 | Tags: Corruption (markets), Renewable Energy, Solar Energy (PV), Wind Power | Category: Electricity, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Grids, Renewable, Solar Power, Wind Power | Print This Post | | …
The criminal profilers estimate that the crime was so well developed that small runs of fraud must have been already at work, in test runs in past elections, and they want to hunt for that evidence now… And they warn that unless they are caught, the fraudsters will only grow. The good news is that there is already insurance software that can check and catch dead, moved, and out of state voters on-the-spot as they try to vote. But the legislatures and FBI aren’t going to do that unless The People speak loudly and speak now… If these experts can predict where and when the worst future election fraud is most likely to occur, we just hope that somehow someway there predictions can be used to stop it. The Sovereign Crime of Industrial Scale Vote FraudOur team members were the lead builders of one of the world’s most sophisticated criminal profiling systems in use by law enforcement today. We broke the eBay auction fraud rings and deployed a never-before-used technology to end auction fraud as an emerging crime category. We identified numerous Medicaid fraud rings and were hired by most of the top 10 property and casualty insurance firms to solve auto crash rings that eluded the FBI and every fraud technology.
It’s what the government agencies didn’t do that reveals the sovereign involvement. The national government refusing to investigate the most egregious examples of voter fraud like hundreds of thousands of more ballots than voters in several states, that is a pretty good indicator that they are passive participants in industrial level vote fraud. The refusal of the FBI to fully investigate Jesse Morgan’s truck with the hundreds of thousands of ballots going from New York to Pennsylvania – yet dispatching agents to a NASCAR location to investigate a garage pull-down they hoped was a noose – well, that’s a good indicator, too. Pretty clearly, the evidence is piling up that the FBI had zero interest in trucks with ballots crossing state lines, ballots being shredded in Maricopa County, tens of thousands of ballots received before being mailed and all sorts of other clues any competent law enforcement agency would at least investigate. The experts were not interested in the 2020 election though — it was “too obvious”: There was no interest on our profilers’ part in doing investigation of massive voter fraud. They felt it was so obvious and the current work being done by citizens and published on hard-to-find blogs was state-of-the-art and no further investigations would find much more. Their comments were striking because they said the data easily available showed the election fraud patterns had two very alarming characteristics: It was not the first time this was tried, and it will be performed again, at scale, in the next election. Fraud behaviour evolves — which means it doesn’t just come out of nowhere, and future directions can be predicted.The sociology of fraud has a start, test runs, and techniques and teams that grow. Successful sub-branches take over: Fraud rings, when organized, grow. They continue to expand with new entrants, slightly different profiles, corrupting more people with money that dwarfs what one might make honestly. Fraud techniques are like an organic species: what works, thrives; and what fails, dies out. Patterns emerge. Patterns equal prediction and prediction enables eradication. The profiling team were not interested in the 2020 election where the fraud was so obvious. They’d rather hunt through past elections to find the early runs they are now sure must be there: The team, educated in some of the most sophisticated organized fraud tactics, posited that this was not a dry run. Their thesis is that if one were to seriously evaluate the balloting in many states for 2014, 2016 and 2018, one will find traces of what happened in 2020. That project is under discussion. The US Supreme Court inaction invites more fraudWithout any punishment or consequences there is no way this fraud will not be used in 2022 and so on. Fraud perps are greedy and when left to commit fraud, for which there was likely millions of dollars in remuneration either presently or in the future, they are not going to stop. As fraudsters recognize that national law enforcement refuses to investigate and the courts will not look at evidence, they are emboldened. Who wouldn’t be? Our courts and law enforcement are saying “come, commit all the fraud you want, we won’t investigate, and if there is litigation, we will toss it out on procedural grounds.” If anyone protests, the FBI may raid their home with an assault vehicle. Don’t believe me, well, meet Christopher Worrell. A lot of the standard level fraud could be stopped live if only there was the will to do it It’s almost like election officials are going out of their way to avoid catching cheats: We have technologies that can identify dead voters the moment they cast a ballot. We can identify people who are out-of-state, voted twice, are underage, live in a vacant lot or a UPS or FedEx postal box. We can even show a photo of that vacant lot so you can see where your fake neighbor claims to live. Literally, the second their ballot is counted, they can be flagged as a likely fraud. Yes, we can deploy that technology today. We have done it in the insurance industry for decades. Keep reading → March 18th, 2021 | Tags: Election (corruption), US Politics | Category: Corruption, Election security, Politics | Print This Post | | |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2024 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Recent Comments