Join up at Crownbet - Click here - Crownbet is Thoroughbred Village’s premier betting partner - Join here now
Forum Home Forum Home > All Sports - Public Forums > Joffs All Sports Bar
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Global Warming or Green-Leftist Lies ...?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Click here for the Thoroughbred Village Home Page. For village news, follow @TBVillage on Twitter. For horseracing tips, follow @Villagebet on Twitter. To contact the Mayor by email: Click Here.

Global Warming or Green-Leftist Lies ...?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 25>
Author
Message
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 12:28pm
Originally posted by Passing Through Passing Through wrote:

Great news, better put your coal fired car order on hold Doc, apparently batteries are the future....who knew??


Fully Charged: Renewables and Storage Powering Australia


Beautiful graphics!Clap ... when do I get my flying car?
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Sponsored Links
Click here to view the promotions at Crownbet.


Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 6:41pm
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Energy supply and demand is a complex and nuanced topic - That's what the arrogant elitists who argue that "the science is settled" and it must be right because it has been "peer reviewed" (greatest hoax of all time) rely upon, glad you mentioned it.Clap

Some poorer countries are indeed investing in coal generated power, esp those with ample reserves of the raw material - hmm, kinda makes your raving commentary fall to bits, doesn't it.Embarrassed

What are these "unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies" you write of?Further, how are they unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable?    - I didn't expect to be giving you a comprehension lesson (well I did really), but - wind and solar, they are not reliable, we don't need them as they do nothing to change outcomes here, and they are at least 7 times more expensive than filthy coal - I hate having to school you, but there you go. Big smile


I'm taking a leap of faith that you've absorbed any of PTs post and/or have browsed the renewable energy data freely available on the internet, eg: https://www.clickenergy.com.au/news-blog/12-countries-leading-the-way-in-renewable-energy/  so I'll let this summary from the International Energy Agency speak for itself:
In 2012, the world relied on renewable sources for around 13.2% of its total primary energy supply. In 2013 renewables accounted for almost 22% of global electricity generation, and the IEA Medium-Term Renewable Energy Report 2015 foresees that share reaching at least 26% increase in 2020.

Can't post the image but half way down the page on the link I've referenced  at the bottom of this post you'll find a graph titled VRE Share in Annual Electricity Generation. It shows for example that Denmark is functioning on nearly 50% renewables,  Ireland/Spain/Germany ~20%, UK/Italy ~15% (2016 data). Scary eh?

Surely even your simple mind is asking how these countries manage to survive and prosper while embracing your unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable technologies? It's called technology/product mix and integration - a very simple concept if you put your mind to it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's possible I suppose that somewhere around the globe your "7 times more expensive" comment might apply (provide the link so we can assess the truth and credibility) however for Australia (which you were referencing in your diatribe) that's not even close to factual, even if you don't factor in the various stages of the technologies involved (renewables V coal). Here's one simple analysis of the Australian situation: http://theconversation.com/factcheck-qanda-is-coal-still-cheaper-than-renewables-as-an-energy-source-81263

It suggests that the LCOE for coal is $40/MWh, renewable $60-70/MWh. I make that under 60% cheaper, a far cry from your mythical 700%. But even those figures are distorted as you will see should you read and absorb the complete fact-check article.

Verdict

Based on the electricity generated now by old coal-fired power stations with sunk costs, Matt Canavan was right to say: “I don’t accept that renewables are, at the moment, cheaper than coal.” In 2017, the marginal cost of generating power from an existing coal station is less than $40/MWh, while wind power is $60-70/MWh.

The Q&A audience member may have been talking about new-buildprices.

Based on recent prices for newly installed wind power of around $60-70/MWh, and recent price projections for new supercritical coal power at around $75/MWh, it is reasonable to say that – as things stand today – wind power would be cheaper than coal as a new-build source of electricity. – Ken Baldwin

Even Baldwin omitted (probably intentionally given the complexity)  two of the significant costs of coal generated power which have been examined elsewhere - the cost of the infrastructure required to find, develop, extract and transport coal; and the externality costs (including deaths - but who cares how many die directly and indirectly from coal mining eh?). Here's one reference to the externalities, I'll post a link to the total cost commentary as soon as I can re-find it:  https://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html 

"In a new report published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Epstein et al. (2011) do a full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal, taking these externalities into account.  Among the factors included in this analysis were:
  • government coal subsidies
  • increased illness and mortality due to mining pollution
  • climate change from greenhouse gas emissions
  • particulates causing air pollution
  • loss of biodiversity
  • cost to taxpayers of environmental monitoring and cleanup
  • decreased property values
  • infrastructure damages from mudslides resulting from mountaintop removal
  • infrastructure damage from mine blasting
  • impacts of acid rain resulting from coal combustion byproducts
  • water pollution

Note that most of these external factors do not apply to most non-fossil fuel energy sources. "

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said above energy is a far more complex topic than you're obviously aware of. 

Given your fragile state of mind I suggest you have a good lie down before you tackle this article about global renewable projections. It's extremely informative but will probably send shivers down your spine:

Happy reading (where's that irony emoji when you need it?).


Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 6:53pm
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Those who blindly accept the Climate change religion are probably knocking on doors in their spare time ,    trying to convince the multitudes that the Jehovah Witness writers have science on their side and The Catholics and Protestants have it all wrong.      IT'S IN TH BOOK.

Wannna bet Macca? 

Unlike you I haven't closed my mind, I've actually done quite a bit of research on the topic  - including reading discussion from semi-skeptical climate scientsist like Judith Curry. What's the basis for YOUR skepticism I wonder? 

Where do you think greenhouse gases go in our closed system? Do they manage to magically defy the laws of Conservation of Energy?

If there's a Religion of The Shut Mind you're guaranteed an automatic membership.
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 7:00pm
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

YES   1-1 ..
Both good value ....     But RAT is placing a lot of faith in READING.

He has to hope , who ever wrote what he reads knew what he was talking about

When you have the money, you can write a lot of stuff that the naive voracious reader will devour with gusto, and then regurgitate on command for you ... sh!te in sh!te out.Wink

Or more correctly in your case:

Information rarely in   -   processor malfunction (chip age and bandwidth issues)   -  puerile garbage out
Back to Top
marble View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2077
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote marble Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 7:08pm
Doc doesn't respond to facts too well 3BM, you need to use larger fonts and brightly coloured letters to get your message across. 
30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year by human activity
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 25358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 8:15pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Those who blindly accept the Climate change religion are probably knocking on doors in their spare time ,    trying to convince the multitudes that the Jehovah Witness writers have science on their side and The Catholics and Protestants have it all wrong.      IT'S IN TH BOOK.


Wannna bet Macca? 

Unlike you I haven't closed my mind, I've actually done quite a bit of research on the topic  - including reading discussion from semi-skeptical climate scientsist like Judith Curry. What's the basis for YOUR skepticism I wonder? 

Where do you think greenhouse gases go in our closed system? Do they manage to magically defy the laws of Conservation of Energy?

If there's a Religion of The Shut Mind you're guaranteed an automatic membership.


Answer one is I use Common Sense.    Your research is reading someone else's opinion.           like Tim Flannery.

Where does the flatulence of thoughtless humans go after release =     Apart from to my nose.       It gets used to feed Roses in my case.

My mind can never shut ..   It was built without a door.      
   
       
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 9:04pm
As promised here's one on the real cost of coal power - including infrastructure. Not the one I recall so I'll keep looking:

Not that it will help our blind friend but here's just one summary of some of the issues at play in electricity prices. It's dated but for anyone interested there are many more which explore the gold plating of infrastructure, the massive overestimation of demand, the cynical market manipulation, the lack of action by the regulator, the lack of power the regulator has to force suppliers to bring power onstream when directed, the lack of direction and decisive policy from government etc etc. 

The market and its regulation is a dogs breakfast which has been ignored for far too long by successive conservative govts.

The real reasons why our power prices are going up

http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/the-real-reasons-why-our-power-prices-are-going-up/news-story/c61b12ecd56001bfbcd2b9f45c581d7b

EVERYONE is pointing fingers about who’s to blame for the power price rises but this is what’s really going on.

AS POWER prices skyrocket it looks like another war on renewables and climate change action is set to be fought.

And consumers are likely to be the losers once again, with everyone pointing fingers about who’s to blame for rising prices.

While former prime minister Tony Abbott once boasted that abolishing the carbon tax would provide instant relief from rising power prices, the impact was short lived with prices now higher than they have ever been in all cities except in Hobart, Darwin and Melbourne.

Power prices jumped on July 1 after three major retailers announced increases of up to 20 per cent and $600 a year for the average customer in some states.

The truth is there are many reasons why electricity prices have been increasing in Australia, and some of them don’t have anything to do with climate change.

Here’s what you need to know.

WE MAY BE GETTING GOUGED BY ELECTRICITY COMPANIES

If you ask the energy companies who’s at fault they’ll point the finger at the closure of coal-fired power plants and blame the rising cost of gas.

But at least one expert believes this excuse is a “total con” and price gouging is to blame.

“Our research shows that the cost of gas makes up just 3 per cent of your final bill and coal just 5 per cent,” The Australia Institute’s senior researcher David Richardson told The Daily Telegraph this week.

“It in no way explains why bills have gone up by 183 per cent on average over the last two decades.”

He’s not the only one who is just a little sceptical, which is why the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is now investigating prices in Queensland, NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT.

The behaviour of the retailers is especially relevant for residential customers because network charges, or what’s called the “poles and wires”, generally make up about 40 per cent of their bills.

The situation in each state does vary depending on many factors including whether there’s enough competition.

In NSW for example, three electricity companies Origin, AGL and Energy Australia control 90 per cent of the market.

These retailers also own the three largest electricity generators in NSW, giving them a lot of control over how much power is produced and how much it’s sold for.

The ACCC had flagged its concerns back in 2014 when AGL wanted to buy Macquarie Generation, which owned two power stations in the Hunter Valley, but the Australian Competition Tribunal approved the sale.

With complaints about rising power prices increasing, the ACCC will now take a fresh look at prices, profits and the level of competition across many states with a preliminary report due on September 27. A final report will be delivered by June 30, 2018.

It is also hosting public forums around Australia to speak directly to customers about their concerns and experiences. Topics include pricing, switching retailers and competition.

Electricity price increases showing impact of carbon price based on the Australian Bureau of Statisticss CPI data (Electricity Price Index) from the March Quarter of 2017 and projected prices on July 1, 2017. Source: ACOSS

Electricity price increases showing impact of carbon price based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics's CPI data (Electricity Price Index) from the March Quarter of 2017 and projected prices on July 1, 2017. Source: ACOSSSource:Supplied

In a report released this week, the Australian Energy Market Commission also found about 70 per cent of people were not shopping around for the best deals, even though this could save some households a whopping $507 a year on electricity (38 per cent). Gas savings could add up to 30 per cent or $285 a year.

Consumers can compare electricity providers in their area on the government-funded website Energy Made Easy.

BUT IT’S TRUE, GAS PRICES ARE GOING UP

Something that most people agree on is that rising gas prices is driving up prices for electricity.

But again many people cite different reasons for why the price of gas is climbing.

It’s partly because people don’t like fracking and opposition to exploration has meant new gas sources are not being developed in states like Victoria, NSW and the Northern Territory.

The gas companies say they need more gas exploration and this is partly because gas produced on Australia’s east coast is now being sent overseas.

ACCC chairman Rod Sims has said previously that demand for gas on the east coast had “tripled virtually overnight” after the opening of new liquefied natural gas plants in Queensland to freeze the gas for shipment overseas.

This has pushed prices up and it doesn’t help that there is little competition in Australia so companies can charge higher prices locally.

But it’s hard to know whether we really need this gas. The government can’t force the companies to reveal how much gas is in the reserves they already have access to.

Some experts have also claimed supply of gas on the east coast is controlled by a “cartel” consisting of a handful of companies, which may also control pipelines used to transport gas around the country.

The Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) has rejected this and said an ACCC investigation found no misuse of market power. But it did accept recommendations for improvements to market transparency and monitoring.

CLOSURE OF COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS

The closure of the Hazelwood power station in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley this year followed other shutdowns including in South Australia and placed more demand on other sources of stable supply like gas, which has unfortunately skyrocketed in price.

Some have blamed the renewable energy target for the closures, which saw coal become less financially competitive compared to solar and wind. The abrupt closures have also created problems with the stability of the system.

Chief Scientist Alan Finkel said Australia’s energy market was not equipped to deal with the transition, and this could impact reliability and security.

But he said the country’s coal fleet was old and coming to the end of its design life, with about 68 per cent of existing coal generating plants reaching 50 years of age by 2035

DON’T BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY

Some have argued that the lack of a clear energy policy in Australia has actually driven up power prices. Mr Finkel believes introducing a Clean Energy Target, which would provide incentives to encourage new wind, gas and other low emissions generators to enter the market is the best way to bring down prices and stabilise the market.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has slammed the proposed target as “a tax on coal” but other experts have backed it, saying uncertainty in the market was actually more destructive.

Energy consultants Jacobs Group (Australia) have done modelling that a CET or Emissions Intensity Scheme would actually keep coal contributing to the energy market for longer than if no model was adopted.

This is because the lack of a clear energy policy means coal plant owners have less incentive to invest in upgrades and maintenance to keep their plants going. It is also discouraging investment in wind and solar power, which would also reduce wholesale prices.

But what’s becoming increasingly clear is that power prices are not going to return to the levels they once were — no matter what the politicians say.

Director of the Grattan Institute’s Energy Program, Tony Wood has told news.com.au that while coal was historically a very cheap way of producing electricity, costing about $40 per megawatt hour, new efficient coal-fired power stations would cost double that, about $80-90Mwh.

Gas is even more expensive, hovering about $110Mwh and even if this dropped due to policy changes, would still likely be about $90Mwh.

“So the only obvious conclusion is we’re not going back to $40Mwh any time soon,” Mr Wood said. “In some ways the negligence of the government is to seek to blame somebody else and not the recognise and communicate to consumers that this is where we are, and we can’t turn back to the good old days.

“We have no choice but to move forward as affordably and reliably as we can.”

Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 9:14pm
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Those who blindly accept the Climate change religion are probably knocking on doors in their spare time ,    trying to convince the multitudes that the Jehovah Witness writers have science on their side and The Catholics and Protestants have it all wrong.      IT'S IN TH BOOK.


Wannna bet Macca? 

Unlike you I haven't closed my mind, I've actually done quite a bit of research on the topic  - including reading discussion from semi-skeptical climate scientsist like Judith Curry. What's the basis for YOUR skepticism I wonder? 

Where do you think greenhouse gases go in our closed system? Do they manage to magically defy the laws of Conservation of Energy?

If there's a Religion of The Shut Mind you're guaranteed an automatic membership.


Answer one is I use Common Sense.    Your research is reading someone else's opinion.           like Tim Flannery.

Where does the flatulence of thoughtless humans go after release =     Apart from to my nose.       It gets used to feed Roses in my case.

My mind can never shut ..   It was built without a door.      
   

So what does your "common sense" tell you about where greenhouse gases (including bovine burps and flatulence) go Macca? 

Scientific research is FAR less about opinion than you think. Unlike your "common sense" opinion for example it needs masses of data, maths, science, research, knowledge etc behind it, it needs to be reviewed by experts in the field, and it WILL be critiqued by both supporters and antagonists. 
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 25358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 9:53pm
A greater power than we mere humans designed this life & planet.     We adapt , evolve and survive in ever changing cycles.    That includes Climate .       . NEVER spend time on what you can do nothing about.   No matter what you do it will be bluddy cold in winter & hot in Summer. The cycles will vary and seem more severe for the sole reason we are more informed and able to view every happening on TV in minutes.
Not many years ago the severe events       came and went and no one knew about most.       Climate is all about putting fear into people and extracting their money , while earning brownie points for political advantage .
Never "JOKE" about Politics , too many get elected.
       
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 10:13pm
Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

Doc doesn't respond to facts too well 3BM, you need to use larger fonts and brightly coloured letters to get your message across. 
30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year by human activity

... and have you noticed how much greener the planet is as a result? ... year in year out, new record crop yields ... what was the bad stuff again???Wacko
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 10:14pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

As promised here's one on the real cost of coal power - including infrastructure. Not the one I recall so I'll keep looking:

Not that it will help our blind friend but here's just one summary of some of the issues at play in electricity prices. It's dated but for anyone interested there are many more which explore the gold plating of infrastructure, the massive overestimation of demand, the cynical market manipulation, the lack of action by the regulator, the lack of power the regulator has to force suppliers to bring power onstream when directed, the lack of direction and decisive policy from government etc etc. 

The market and its regulation is a dogs breakfast which has been ignored for far too long by successive conservative govts.

The real reasons why our power prices are going up

http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/the-real-reasons-why-our-power-prices-are-going-up/news-story/c61b12ecd56001bfbcd2b9f45c581d7b

EVERYONE is pointing fingers about who’s to blame for the power price rises but this is what’s really going on.

AS POWER prices skyrocket it looks like another war on renewables and climate change action is set to be fought.

And consumers are likely to be the losers once again, with everyone pointing fingers about who’s to blame for rising prices.

While former prime minister Tony Abbott once boasted that abolishing the carbon tax would provide instant relief from rising power prices, the impact was short lived with prices now higher than they have ever been in all cities except in Hobart, Darwin and Melbourne.

Power prices jumped on July 1 after three major retailers announced increases of up to 20 per cent and $600 a year for the average customer in some states.

The truth is there are many reasons why electricity prices have been increasing in Australia, and some of them don’t have anything to do with climate change.

Here’s what you need to know.

WE MAY BE GETTING GOUGED BY ELECTRICITY COMPANIES

If you ask the energy companies who’s at fault they’ll point the finger at the closure of coal-fired power plants and blame the rising cost of gas.

But at least one expert believes this excuse is a “total con” and price gouging is to blame.

“Our research shows that the cost of gas makes up just 3 per cent of your final bill and coal just 5 per cent,” The Australia Institute’s senior researcher David Richardson told The Daily Telegraph this week.

“It in no way explains why bills have gone up by 183 per cent on average over the last two decades.”

He’s not the only one who is just a little sceptical, which is why the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is now investigating prices in Queensland, NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT.

The behaviour of the retailers is especially relevant for residential customers because network charges, or what’s called the “poles and wires”, generally make up about 40 per cent of their bills.

The situation in each state does vary depending on many factors including whether there’s enough competition.

In NSW for example, three electricity companies Origin, AGL and Energy Australia control 90 per cent of the market.

These retailers also own the three largest electricity generators in NSW, giving them a lot of control over how much power is produced and how much it’s sold for.

The ACCC had flagged its concerns back in 2014 when AGL wanted to buy Macquarie Generation, which owned two power stations in the Hunter Valley, but the Australian Competition Tribunal approved the sale.

With complaints about rising power prices increasing, the ACCC will now take a fresh look at prices, profits and the level of competition across many states with a preliminary report due on September 27. A final report will be delivered by June 30, 2018.

It is also hosting public forums around Australia to speak directly to customers about their concerns and experiences. Topics include pricing, switching retailers and competition.

Electricity price increases showing impact of carbon price based on the Australian Bureau of Statisticss CPI data (Electricity Price Index) from the March Quarter of 2017 and projected prices on July 1, 2017. Source: ACOSS

Electricity price increases showing impact of carbon price based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics's CPI data (Electricity Price Index) from the March Quarter of 2017 and projected prices on July 1, 2017. Source: ACOSSSource:Supplied

In a report released this week, the Australian Energy Market Commission also found about 70 per cent of people were not shopping around for the best deals, even though this could save some households a whopping $507 a year on electricity (38 per cent). Gas savings could add up to 30 per cent or $285 a year.

Consumers can compare electricity providers in their area on the government-funded website Energy Made Easy.

BUT IT’S TRUE, GAS PRICES ARE GOING UP

Something that most people agree on is that rising gas prices is driving up prices for electricity.

But again many people cite different reasons for why the price of gas is climbing.

It’s partly because people don’t like fracking and opposition to exploration has meant new gas sources are not being developed in states like Victoria, NSW and the Northern Territory.

The gas companies say they need more gas exploration and this is partly because gas produced on Australia’s east coast is now being sent overseas.

ACCC chairman Rod Sims has said previously that demand for gas on the east coast had “tripled virtually overnight” after the opening of new liquefied natural gas plants in Queensland to freeze the gas for shipment overseas.

This has pushed prices up and it doesn’t help that there is little competition in Australia so companies can charge higher prices locally.

But it’s hard to know whether we really need this gas. The government can’t force the companies to reveal how much gas is in the reserves they already have access to.

Some experts have also claimed supply of gas on the east coast is controlled by a “cartel” consisting of a handful of companies, which may also control pipelines used to transport gas around the country.

The Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) has rejected this and said an ACCC investigation found no misuse of market power. But it did accept recommendations for improvements to market transparency and monitoring.

CLOSURE OF COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS

The closure of the Hazelwood power station in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley this year followed other shutdowns including in South Australia and placed more demand on other sources of stable supply like gas, which has unfortunately skyrocketed in price.

Some have blamed the renewable energy target for the closures, which saw coal become less financially competitive compared to solar and wind. The abrupt closures have also created problems with the stability of the system.

Chief Scientist Alan Finkel said Australia’s energy market was not equipped to deal with the transition, and this could impact reliability and security.

But he said the country’s coal fleet was old and coming to the end of its design life, with about 68 per cent of existing coal generating plants reaching 50 years of age by 2035

DON’T BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY

Some have argued that the lack of a clear energy policy in Australia has actually driven up power prices. Mr Finkel believes introducing a Clean Energy Target, which would provide incentives to encourage new wind, gas and other low emissions generators to enter the market is the best way to bring down prices and stabilise the market.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has slammed the proposed target as “a tax on coal” but other experts have backed it, saying uncertainty in the market was actually more destructive.

Energy consultants Jacobs Group (Australia) have done modelling that a CET or Emissions Intensity Scheme would actually keep coal contributing to the energy market for longer than if no model was adopted.

This is because the lack of a clear energy policy means coal plant owners have less incentive to invest in upgrades and maintenance to keep their plants going. It is also discouraging investment in wind and solar power, which would also reduce wholesale prices.

But what’s becoming increasingly clear is that power prices are not going to return to the levels they once were — no matter what the politicians say.

Director of the Grattan Institute’s Energy Program, Tony Wood has told news.com.au that while coal was historically a very cheap way of producing electricity, costing about $40 per megawatt hour, new efficient coal-fired power stations would cost double that, about $80-90Mwh.

Gas is even more expensive, hovering about $110Mwh and even if this dropped due to policy changes, would still likely be about $90Mwh.

“So the only obvious conclusion is we’re not going back to $40Mwh any time soon,” Mr Wood said. “In some ways the negligence of the government is to seek to blame somebody else and not the recognise and communicate to consumers that this is where we are, and we can’t turn back to the good old days.

“We have no choice but to move forward as affordably and reliably as we can.”


The Conversation ... may as well stick to your Q&A transcripts.Embarrassed
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 10:30pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Energy supply and demand is a complex and nuanced topic - That's what the arrogant elitists who argue that "the science is settled" and it must be right because it has been "peer reviewed" (greatest hoax of all time) rely upon, glad you mentioned it.Clap

Some poorer countries are indeed investing in coal generated power, esp those with ample reserves of the raw material - hmm, kinda makes your raving commentary fall to bits, doesn't it.Embarrassed

What are these "unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies" you write of?Further, how are they unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable?    - I didn't expect to be giving you a comprehension lesson (well I did really), but - wind and solar, they are not reliable, we don't need them as they do nothing to change outcomes here, and they are at least 7 times more expensive than filthy coal - I hate having to school you, but there you go. Big smile


I'm taking a leap of faith that you've absorbed any of PTs post and/or have browsed the renewable energy data freely available on the internet, eg: https://www.clickenergy.com.au/news-blog/12-countries-leading-the-way-in-renewable-energy/  so I'll let this summary from the International Energy Agency speak for itself:
In 2012, the world relied on renewable sources for around 13.2% of its total primary energy supply. In 2013 renewables accounted for almost 22% of global electricity generation, and the IEA Medium-Term Renewable Energy Report 2015 foresees that share reaching at least 26% increase in 2020.

Can't post the image but half way down the page on the link I've referenced  at the bottom of this post you'll find a graph titled VRE Share in Annual Electricity Generation. It shows for example that Denmark is functioning on nearly 50% renewables,  Ireland/Spain/Germany ~20%, UK/Italy ~15% (2016 data). Scary eh?

Surely even your simple mind is asking how these countries manage to survive and prosper while embracing your unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable technologies? It's called technology/product mix and integration - a very simple concept if you put your mind to it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's possible I suppose that somewhere around the globe your "7 times more expensive" comment might apply (provide the link so we can assess the truth and credibility) however for Australia (which you were referencing in your diatribe) that's not even close to factual, even if you don't factor in the various stages of the technologies involved (renewables V coal). Here's one simple analysis of the Australian situation: http://theconversation.com/factcheck-qanda-is-coal-still-cheaper-than-renewables-as-an-energy-source-81263

It suggests that the LCOE for coal is $40/MWh, renewable $60-70/MWh. I make that under 60% cheaper, a far cry from your mythical 700%. But even those figures are distorted as you will see should you read and absorb the complete fact-check article.

Verdict

Based on the electricity generated now by old coal-fired power stations with sunk costs, Matt Canavan was right to say: “I don’t accept that renewables are, at the moment, cheaper than coal.” In 2017, the marginal cost of generating power from an existing coal station is less than $40/MWh, while wind power is $60-70/MWh.

The Q&A audience member may have been talking about new-buildprices.

Based on recent prices for newly installed wind power of around $60-70/MWh, and recent price projections for new supercritical coal power at around $75/MWh, it is reasonable to say that – as things stand today – wind power would be cheaper than coal as a new-build source of electricity. – Ken Baldwin

Even Baldwin omitted (probably intentionally given the complexity)  two of the significant costs of coal generated power which have been examined elsewhere - the cost of the infrastructure required to find, develop, extract and transport coal; and the externality costs (including deaths - but who cares how many die directly and indirectly from coal mining eh?). Here's one reference to the externalities, I'll post a link to the total cost commentary as soon as I can re-find it:  https://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html 

"In a new report published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Epstein et al. (2011) do a full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal, taking these externalities into account.  Among the factors included in this analysis were:
  • government coal subsidies
  • increased illness and mortality due to mining pollution
  • climate change from greenhouse gas emissions
  • particulates causing air pollution
  • loss of biodiversity
  • cost to taxpayers of environmental monitoring and cleanup
  • decreased property values
  • infrastructure damages from mudslides resulting from mountaintop removal
  • infrastructure damage from mine blasting
  • impacts of acid rain resulting from coal combustion byproducts
  • water pollution

Note that most of these external factors do not apply to most non-fossil fuel energy sources. "

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said above energy is a far more complex topic than you're obviously aware of. 

Given your fragile state of mind I suggest you have a good lie down before you tackle this article about global renewable projections. It's extremely informative but will probably send shivers down your spine:

Happy reading (where's that irony emoji when you need it?).


Since your first two links don't work (and the 3rd is just a porn site for Greenies), you have again conveniently failed to advise us what percentage of the world's energy is produced by solar and wind mills ... NOT significant compared with the Hoopla! Ooops!Embarrassed

And since we have a slightly different topographical profile to many European countries who can use geothermal and hydro, and our Greens have an aversion to dams and nuclear, we need coal, because WIND AND SOLAR ARE UNRELIABLE AND EXPENSIVE AND DO NOTHING TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY EVEN IF WE USE THEM AT THE EXCLUSION OF COAL  ... I do like more pictures if you can supply them btw ... maybe you have something on coral bleaching that you can blame on coal?
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
marble View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2077
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote marble Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 5:05am
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

Doc doesn't respond to facts too well 3BM, you need to use larger fonts and brightly coloured letters to get your message across. 
30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year by human activity

... and have you noticed how much greener the planet is as a result? ... year in year out, new record crop yields ... what was the bad stuff again???Wacko
lets try and keep this simple because your so thick - its called carbon dioxide - humans have released more in 200 years than plants have stored since the beginning of time. Do you think that might have created an imbalance? 
CO2 is a greehhouse gas - it traps heat close to the earth
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 9:39am
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

A greater power than we mere humans designed this life & planet.     We adapt , evolve and survive in ever changing cycles.    That includes Climate .       . NEVER spend time on what you can do nothing about.   No matter what you do it will be bluddy cold in winter & hot in Summer. The cycles will vary and seem more severe for the sole reason we are more informed and able to view every happening on TV in minutes.
Not many years ago the severe events       came and went and no one knew about most.       Climate is all about putting fear into people and extracting their money , while earning brownie points for political advantage .
Never "JOKE" about Politics , too many get elected.

Yes yes yes, climate scientists, paleontologists etc can give you reams of information about past cycles, based on years of the research and knowledge I've already spoken about, hence the reason that the very first cab off the rank in the search for what things are driving current global warming was "is it a natural part of the cycle". We know the answer to that - well some of us do, and it would take you less than an hour to know it too. 

Common sense says to me I know far far less than experts in the field, that any uninformed "common sense" comment that I would make regarding those drivers should be taken with a grain of salt, and if I repeated the same rubbish I should be treated with well deserved derision. 

Just out of interest. How do you know that climate has changed drastically on this planet in the past? Have you been reincarnated for millions of years - lived as an amoeba originally then perhaps became a dinosaur, then finally a homo sapiens? Or was that (limited) knowledge planted in your brain at birth so you've always "just known it"? My money's on the fact that you've been taught it, read or heard about it and that your scant knowledge of it has come from well publicised credible scientific research. The irony.
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 10:07am
Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

Doc doesn't respond to facts too well 3BM, you need to use larger fonts and brightly coloured letters to get your message across. 
30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year by human activity

... and have you noticed how much greener the planet is as a result? ... year in year out, new record crop yields ... what was the bad stuff again???Wacko
lets try and keep this simple because your so thick - its called carbon dioxide - humans have released more in 200 years than plants have stored since the beginning of time. Do you think that might have created an imbalance? 
CO2 is a greehhouse gas - it traps heat close to the earth

So crop yield figures are fake? ... the actual changes in climate are fake? ... the models are all we need?Dead
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 10:08am
... oh I see, I'M thick! LOL
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 10:20am
Originally posted by Dr ESince your first two links don't work (and the 3rd is just a porn site for Greenies), you have again conveniently failed to advise us what percentage of the world's energy is produced by solar and wind mills ... NOT significant compared with the Hoopla! Ooops!<img src=smileys/smiley9.gif border=0 alt=Embarrassed title=Embarrassed /><div><br></div><div>And since we have a slightly different topographical profile to many European countries who can use geothermal and hydro, and our Greens have an aversion to dams and nuclear, we need coal, because WIND AND SOLAR ARE UNRELIABLE AND EXPENSIVE AND DO NOTHING TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY EVEN IF WE USE THEM AT THE EXCLUSION OF COAL  ... I do like more pictures if you can supply them btw ... maybe you have something on coral bleaching that you can blame on coal?</div>[/QUOTE Dr ESince your first two links don't work (and the 3rd is just a porn site for Greenies), you have again conveniently failed to advise us what percentage of the world's energy is produced by solar and wind mills ... NOT significant compared with the Hoopla! Ooops!Embarrassed

And since we have a slightly different topographical profile to many European countries who can use geothermal and hydro, and our Greens have an aversion to dams and nuclear, we need coal, because WIND AND SOLAR ARE UNRELIABLE AND EXPENSIVE AND DO NOTHING TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY EVEN IF WE USE THEM AT THE EXCLUSION OF COAL  ... I do like more pictures if you can supply them btw ... maybe you have something on coral bleaching that you can blame on coal?
[/QUOTE wrote:



The growth of renewables is hardly the point but to help you out of your technical miasma simply remove %20 from the first URL and Bob's your uncle. The last link has similar sort of info so don't get your knickers in a twist. As I've said already - there are numerous websites with similar information if in fact you really want to know more about the topic. 

The basic point is this: you claim renewables are "unreliable, garbage, more garbage", yet not only do they have significant place in current advanced countries with strong economies across the world, they are an ever growing energy source for obvious reasons. We wont be alive to see it but we can guess at where they will be when they have had the same period of use as coal power. It would seem that someone has the wrong end of the stick, no pr

The growth of renewables is hardly the point but to help you out of your technical miasma simply remove %20 from the first URL and Bob's your uncle. The last link has similar sort of info so don't get your knickers in a twist. As I've said already - there are numerous websites with similar information if in fact you really want to know more about the topic. 

The basic point is this: you claim renewables are "unreliable, garbage, more garbage", yet not only do they have significant place in current advanced countries with strong economies across the world, they are an ever growing energy source for obvious reasons. We wont be alive to see it but we can guess at where they will be when they have had the same period of use as coal power. It would seem that someone has the wrong end of the stick, no prizes for guessing who that might be.

Not surprised you'd simply dismiss the topic of externalities - after all you didn't even have a tiny clue about what constitutes real costs of technologies. Now that some of the costs/issues you knew nothing whatsoever about have been revealed to you your answer is simply to ignore them. The words puerile and stupid are barely adequate to describe such inane behaviour from an adult.

We can use geothermal? Seriously? You likely mean nuclear which of course has it's own issues, including full life cost - but you knew that didn't you? Hydro? Glad you brought this up because it's sort of renewable but as Tasmanian's know well it currently relies on rainfall.  Top up hydro doesn't need massive new dams, certainly doesn't need Tirnbull's expensive Snowy extension "solution". You should read about it some time.

Speaking of LIARS (which all cons are as we know - easy card to play that one isn't it, although there's an obvious problem). You're at serious risk of being called one unless you produce that 7x data requested. If you simply plucked the number from your nether regions (or it fell out accidentally along with much of your other "opinion") perhaps you'd care to acknowledge same. We've already seen that in the Australian context which you were addressing it's just another case of you being uninformed or ill-informed. The question is did you simply make it up or was it an honest mistake?
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 11:40am
"We wont be alive to see it but we can guess at where they will be when they have had the same period of use as coal power."

At last! ... something sensible that I can agree withThumbs Up 

... plenty of GUESSING goes on in Climate Modelling by the Climate "Scientists" ... but I acknowledge that somewhere in the future, the technology will become useful and affordable ... I expect I will have my flying car before that! ... wont be wind or solar powered, I'm "guessing".Tongue

"The basic point is this: you claim renewables are "unreliable, garbage, more garbage", yet not only do they have *significant place in current advanced countries with strong economies across the world, they are an ever growing energy source for obvious reasons." 

*insignificant

Yep, money from dumb Government subsidies is the obvious reason for their growth, but you do know that America has just pulled the pin on any commitment to the Paris Agreement (do they qualify as a "strong economy"? ... I can never read financial markets!). Guess there's gunna be a lot of out of work Climate "Scientists"Embarrassed ... wonder what their modeling will end up looking like if they all get jobs with Big Bad Coal Pushing Companies?
 
In the mean time, since our irrational push for renewables in Australia, which is driven by arrogant, egotistical, pseudo intellects, whom it is now abundantly clear have been conned by rent seeking big business, and are either too insecure or too far down the rabbit hole to turn back (oh well, at least you snowflakes get to sooth your feelings of guilt and self loathingCryDOES NOTHING TO CHANGE CLIMATE, but does does damage to our economy as the Marxists lobby to stop us from using our natural resources, and causes untenable financial hardship and health issues for huge portions of our population who are least able to cope with the costs, people that you have and will never even meet ... Let's not bother! 

You really need to keep up btw ... I'm one of the few honest poster in here, I always acknowledge my mistakes ... I have already "schooled" the "Prince of Sarcasm, Pauper of Facts" PT, many times on the cost of solar and wind technology compared to coal ... maybe you can go away and read about it and come back with the facts ... 

Pro Tip - you wont find it in The Guardian or transcripts from any Channel 2 TV programs!Wink
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 7:44pm
Here are a few facts, which are indisputable. The evidence is writ large across many of your posts: 
(1) you wouldn't have even the faintest idea whether climate scientists are "guessing" - they aren't but that's really a secondary issue. In most of my posts I'm exposing your "credibility" (next to none) and your obvious ignorance. Your puerility speaks for itself.
(2) your views lack integrity, but beyond that we've also discovered that you'll lie barefaced when it suits. Some might say so what, that's standard fare for cons in particular (Trump being an obvious examplar) but that would be accepting mediocrity, ignorance and fwitism as the equivalent to truth and knowledge, in the same way that Trump elevated extreme white supremacists post Charlottsville.
(3) Your standard modus operandi is to make sweeping statements which are not backed up by any evidence. They lack any understanding of the topics you attempt to tackle, to the extent that you've become a parody of your own making.

Here's the latest example:
but does does damage to our economy as the Marxists lobby to stop us from using our natural resources, and causes untenable financial hardship and health issues for huge portions of our population who are least able to cope with the costs, people that you have and will never even meet

Anyone who has done even a modicum of reading on the reasons for rising energy prices will know that the major causes of price shock is not renewables. I gave you a link to one bit of info on the topic of electricity prices previously (from a News Ltd site, shock horror) but as we know you don't read, let alone absorb.

Here's a Fed Parliament briefing on the topic. Note this in particular because the same thing is repeated in virtually every analysis of rising electricity prices: However the cost of transporting energy and wholesale costs typically accounts for around three-quarters of the final energy bill.


Here's another from one of your other fav sources The Courier Fail which looks at Qld prices. 

Odd there's not even a passing reference to renewables as part of the reason for skyrocketing prices don't you think? They do play a small role depending on the jurisdiction but even the Murdoch press couldn't swallow your line of complete ignorance. 

To put the final nail in the coffin of your ignorance (there are so many examples which expose your ignorance we have to end somewhere), The ACCC's enquiry put the gross "environmental" component of electricity prices at 7%. 
Given you think that figures like 50%, 20% and 15% (Denmark, Ireland, UK etc renewable energy mix mentioned in a previous post) are insignificant we can take it that you'd agree a 7% "responsibility" is fairly minor? Even your greatest admirers are surely questioning your credibility at this point, if not your sanity

Hardship
We've established that "Marxist" renewables actually play a minor role in energy price pain so let's briefly touch on mitigation. Politics could easily resolve hardship by properly regulating energy markets - esp supply; not cutting pensioner payments (Abbott and Turnbull) - we've entered the externality sphere now, are you still following?; extracting proper payment for our gas assets; preventing price gouging;...The list of things governments could do in regard to softening the effect of energy price shock is almost limitless.

Something quite shocking - esp for an ideologically blind con
Interesting developments in Germany wrt power prices recently. You'll have read abut them no doubt (roflmao) but for those who haven't this will make for very interesting reading: 

Renewables and economy
A small extract:
According to the research, the growth in renewables would see a corresponding growth in Australia’s economy of 1.7 per cent above business as usual, even factoring in a likely decline in coal exports. 
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 9:40pm
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

You really need to keep up btw ... I'm one of the few honest poster in here, I always acknowledge my mistakes ... 

One of your best, but then again I suspect your idea of honesty is, like your knowledge, not quite up to the low standards required of even this forum.  The bottom of the barrel standards you display here may not truly reflect your personal integrity - anonymous forums no doubt embolden you - but they undoubtedly reflect your real character. I've come across a few nutters on TBV but I'm struggling to think of any which come anywhere near you for puerility and self-imposed ignorance. 
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 25358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 10:45pm
OOOOWAAA    RAT .   Your in a fighting mood ...   lol ..   

   It's all That coal dust in the air from the thousands of Coal fired burners in China , Indonesia , India   ,    being blown our way by these windmills we have erected.
       
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:44am
Geez, I hope you don't want me to do a "modicum" of reading... if so stop posting so much bullgelati 3bm, you know I asked for more pictures !Cry

You don't address ANY of my points, you just regurgitate the stock standard GetUpset, Greens, Soros "research" crapolla! ... the punters WILL mark you down for that!Dead

UNRELIABLE and UNNECESSARY Solar and Wind are absolutely responsible for high energy costs, since they are subsidised at a rate SEVEN(7) TIMES the rate that coal is, and then they demand big batteries (cost undisclosed - see Tesla Annual Report and record losses) and diesel generators and fuel to be on standby - who tf actually makes diesel generators outside third world countries fiddlesticks? ... let's cut all subsidies and see what the market buys ... very simple maths really, it ain't Climate Science, that's for sure ... and don't blame governments - you voted for them! ... do you really think you can con people using Denmark, Ireland, UK and Germany as examples - they are relevant to Australia how? ... again, there you go comparing penises with vaginas again ... Wacko 

Why are you wasting your time on this ... if you stop throwing up meaningless, irrelevant crap, and just admit that I'm right, and move on, I'm sure nobody will think any less of you! ... I certainly couldn'tWink

Try READING my posts, and ANSWERING my questions, rather than going on a cut and paste rampage ... and work harder on the gratuitous insults ya loose goose!!Shocked


In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:47am
Oh, and if Australia was somehow carbon free tomorrow (say, the population was exterminated) ... what difference would that make to Global Warming, Global Cooling or  Climate Change ... no sh!te now!Wink
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 8:34am
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:


You don't address ANY of my points, you just regurgitate the stock standard GetUpset, Greens, Soros "research" crapolla! ... the punters WILL mark you down for that!Dead

UNRELIABLE and UNNECESSARY Solar and Wind are absolutely responsible for high energy costs, since they are subsidised at a rate SEVEN(7) TIMES the rate that coal is, 



Dunning Kruger and head up @rse syndrome is a rare quinella. Extraordinarily you're on a roll and have scored both the trifecta - ignorance of the highest order - and the first four wit your puerility. 

Let me help you out. You've lost the argument about electricity prices because of your failings in three areas - you don't read, you don't comprehend more than headlines, and you've allowed your ideology to cloud whatever tiny bit of reason you might have had at one time.

Here are a few clues for your reading. We'll ignore the economics of employment and investment generated by subsidies because you obviously don't know about that and it's beyond your capability to understand it. 

All eary technologies are subsidised in some way, as are businesses - when will we see your outrage of business subsidisation I wonder? Rhetorical question but the answer is never because you've obviously never given a thought to how complex systems work, why r7D is subsidised and incentivised, etc etc. 

Coal power was initially and still is subsidised via taxpayer finding of infrastructure for mines, along with extremely generous tax concessions. The previously referenced externalities which you've simply ignored (because of the HUAS affliction mentioned above) are also subsidies. The public pays through the nose as a result, as does the environment, but as you clearly place no value on the environment I understand why you wouldn't be able to see the obvious. 

To pitch this at a level you might understand (33/1): 
Think about cigarette smoking. Taxpayers subsidise tobacco companies by having to clean up their mess at the other end. This could be thought of as downstream subsidisation. If you'd done your research on nuclear power (aka "geothermal in your world - lol) you'd know that this is what makes nuclear pps an expensive option in $ terms - decommissioning and waste management.

I could elaborate but I'm afraid your brain has been full for a long time and needs to offload some of that con garbage before it function in reverse gear again.
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 25358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 8:49am
Now I know why they have cemeteries in preference to crematoriums.
       
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 11:09am
Cemeteries are carbon sequestration Macca. What a f'ing waste of money that nonsense currently is - well the geological part at least.
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 12:07pm

[renewables]  "are at least 7 times more expensive than filthy coal"
[renewables] "are subsidised at a rate SEVEN(7) TIMES the rate that coal is"

You seem to be in a state of mental confusion and disorientation. 

Having not provided any evidence of the first (since shown to be arrant nonsense) can we presume the same will apply for your latest version? 

I suggest you stay off the laxatives for a while, or at least refrain from trawling through the results for your next opinion.
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 18907
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 12:58pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:


[renewables]  "are at least 7 times more expensive than filthy coal"
[renewables] "are subsidised at a rate SEVEN(7) TIMES the rate that coal is"

You seem to be in a state of mental confusion and disorientation. 

Having not provided any evidence of the first (since shown to be arrant nonsense) can we presume the same will apply for your latest version? 

I suggest you stay off the laxatives for a while, or at least refrain from trawling through the results for your next opinion.

Do your research, it's all been stated before ... my but you are tedious and lazy! ... if I have to teach you any more, I'll have to start invoicing you!Embarrassed
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Softy View Drop Down
Yearling
Yearling


Joined: 24 Sep 2017
Location: Tas
Status: Online
Points: 134
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Softy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:03pm
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 17522
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:10pm
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:


[renewables]  "are at least 7 times more expensive than filthy coal"
[renewables] "are subsidised at a rate SEVEN(7) TIMES the rate that coal is"

You seem to be in a state of mental confusion and disorientation. 

Having not provided any evidence of the first (since shown to be arrant nonsense) can we presume the same will apply for your latest version? 

I suggest you stay off the laxatives for a while, or at least refrain from trawling through the results for your next opinion.

Do your research, it's all been stated before ... my but you are tedious and lazy! ... if I have to teach you any more, I'll have to start invoicing you!Embarrassed

No kidding. You're an absolute champ at statements without basis. SOP for your ilk of course. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 25>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.