Print Page | Close Window

Global Warming or Green-Leftist Lies ...?

Printed From: Thoroughbred Village
Category: All Sports - Public Forums
Forum Name: Joffs All Sports Bar
Forum Description: Visit the famous All Sports Forum to chat with friends about any sporting topic
URL: https://forum.thoroughbredvillage.com.au/forum_posts.asp?TID=61744
Printed Date: 29 Mar 2024 at 6:49pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Global Warming or Green-Leftist Lies ...?
Posted By: Dr E
Subject: Global Warming or Green-Leftist Lies ...?
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 4:46am
... but the "science is settled" ... according to the corrupt liars.



-------------
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!



Replies:
Posted By: VOYAGER
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 2:31pm
I have said it before, and I will say it again.

The planet has been cooling down and warming up, long before humans existed, so yes global warming is happening. 

Is it the fault of humans? No.

Does human activity accelerate global warming? Perhaps.

Does global warming have any effect on climate change? Yes.

Is climate change more adverse to human populations, than global warming? Yes.

Why? Because if you have severe droughts, and extreme floods during your food growing periods, your ability to feed everyone is lost.

Is climate change reversible? No. Once you have a region of your country which is effected by prolonged, and extreme conditions, it is just about impossible to regain that productive land.

Should governments do something about climate change? What an idea. In Australia for instance you could develop a network of man made waterways, which divert flood waters to catchment facilities, and then pipe the water to areas which are drought prone.

This idea is not new. My home town of Goulburn, had some of the harshest water restriction in the country during the early part of this century. We now have water piped from a river which is feed by coastal waters to our east, so the water needs to be treated, but a virtually non stop supply of water, and since the pipeline has been operating in late 2013, our water supply has not dropped under 75%, and it is currently at 95% 

The government just needs to understand what will happen to Australia and actually do something about the issue, but I think there is more chance of hell freezing over, than that happening!

As far as the greens go, they are the modern day Arab terrorists from the 1970's, who hijacked planes and kidnapped those who they thought should be punished. People, who think fear, lies, exaggeration and doomsday statements and actions, will get people to start supporting them.

Good luck with that!   


-------------
Remember, it might take intelligence to be smart , but it takes experience to be wise


Posted By: Gay3
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 4:31pm
One of the best posts on the subject that I've seen Voyager Clap
Why do people think the cities of once great civilisations are now metres under the ground?
Climate with never stop changing & we must adjust, particularly in terms of water supply but governments slumber untill it's too late e.g.Cape Town now & San Paolo not long ago who were saved by heavy rains, the former won't be so lucky, having peaked at their long term forecast.



-------------
Wisdom has been chasing me but I've always outrun it!


Posted By: jujuno
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 6:14pm


-------------
Desert War, Rain Lover, Latin Knight, Hay List, Mustard...my turf heroes...


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 7:33pm
why do we need another thread on this ?


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 7:36pm
i have terrific warnings re weather from other living things.

Ants tell you when there's rain coming .

I hope their not too long telling me about similar "Pending Pleasures"


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 7:59pm
Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

why do we need another thread on this ?

why not. is very topical.

have seen several programs lately, Greenland etc, whereby their climate has changed to an extent that they are getting warmer clime fish to harvest, their pastures are grassier etc. some like it, some dont.

as gay said, adapt.

adaption happens all over the world; climate, super powers, political.....


Posted By: Softy
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 8:03pm
I’m from Kiribati.
I will learn to adapt to.
Thanks.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/islands-threatened-by-climate-change-2012-10?r=US&IR=T#kiribati-1" rel="nofollow - https://www.businessinsider.com.au/islands-threatened-by-climate-change-2012-10?r=US&IR=T#kiribati-1


Posted By: Sneck
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2018 at 8:32pm
The climate change alarmists never really thought through their positions beyond basic political pandering.

The development of the western world has created perhaps irreversible climate change but the developing world will emit significantly more.

The logical conclusion to their assertions is the genocide of the developing world because they will refuse to not be allowed to develop and if they develop they'll destroy the earth.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 07 Feb 2018 at 12:25am
Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

why do we need another thread on this ?

Why, is the "science settled"?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!


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 8:17am


The 11 cities most likely to run out of drinking water - like Cape Town

  • 11 February 2018

Cape Town is in the unenviable situation of being the first major city in the modern era to face the threat of running out of drinking water.

However, the plight of the drought-hit South African city is just one extreme example of a problem that experts have long been warning about - water scarcity.

Despite covering about 70% of the Earth's surface, water, especially drinking water, is not as plentiful as one might think. Only 3% of it is fresh.

Over one billion people lack access to water and another 2.7 billion find it scarce for at least one month of the year. A 2014 survey of the world's 500 largest cities estimates that one in four are in a situation of "water stress"

According to UN-endorsed projections, global demand for fresh water will exceed supply by 40% in 2030, thanks to a combination of climate change, human action and population growth.

It shouldn't be a surprise, then, that Cape Town is just the tip of the iceberg. Here are the other 11 cities most likely to run out of water.

1. S£o Paulo

Brazil's financial capital and one of the 10 most populated cities in the world went through a similar ordeal to Cape Town in 2015, when the main reservoir fell below 4% capacity.

At the height of the crisis, the city of over 21.7 million inhabitants had less than 20 days of water supply and police had to escort water trucks to sto more......

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-42982959" rel="nofollow - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-42982959



-------------


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 10:51am
What about Sydney!!!??? ... don't forget Sydney!Ermm

-------------
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!


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 11:04am
I'm glad you asked about Sydney because as far as the obvious solution goes..... we already got oneWink

The solution to Cape Town's water crisis is obvious - but it will cost us

12 February 2018, 10:38

It is no secret that water is running out in Cape Town and that Day Zero is all but inevitable.

You just need to look at spending habits of Capetonians to see that this realisation has firmly set in. Gone are the 5 litre water containers from all major retailers. The same goes for hand sanitisers and paper plates. Good luck finding a Sputnik washing machine, Air-to-Water machine or a borehole supplier with less than a two-month waiting period.

Unlike the electricity crisis a few years back, which gave city folk a routine camping experience, complete with gas cookers, candles and cooler boxes, a long-term water shortage is no laughing matter.

And make no mistake, unlike the electricity crisis that saw load shedding for a few hours at a time, the water crisis is going to be more drawn out and intense. Once the taps go off it is going to be months before they come on again.

The first few weeks will feel like a bad camping experience where we all look at each other and regard the dirt and body odour as par for the course, but as the months roll over the rise in disease and "gatvolness" of the residence to queue every day for water is going to reach a boiling point.

The recent push-back of Day Zero is nothing to celebrate. This is only possible because the agriculture sector is being deprived of water when they need it most, in the heat of summer. The knock-on effect to food prices in the next few months is only going to aggravate people more.

The only viable, long-term solution to the water crisis is large-scale desalination. This has been proposed many times and is continually shot down due to high capital outlay and that it may become a white-elephant if the rain patterns return to normal.

What the opponents to large-scale desalination have not factored in is the following:

The DA in the Western Cape are a victim of their own success. Over the last number of years, the good governance in the Western Cape has seen the province swelling due to mass migration of people from other parts of the country, Africa and even overseas. All these new people need to drink, clean and toilet, and all these things require water.

Secondly, no new dams have been built in ages as the Western Cape population increased. But even if they had built more dams, a dam is still only as reliable as the rainfall it receives.

Agriculture and tourism in the Western Cape are major sources of income and are both growing exponentially each year.

While national and local government stick to the line that we would have been fine if we reduced consumption, that is true to an extent, but if you follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion, at the rate of growth of the city, we will all end up with a cup of water ration per day and will be told to be grateful. For a tangible picture of this scenario, watch the film, The Martian, where Matt Damon’s character must exist on an ever-shrinking potato supply to stay alive.

Thanks, but no thanks. I would prefer to live in a city where I can take a long luxurious shower or deep bath, swim in a clean bright pool and see lush green grass and plants all around me, where both the residence and the farmers have an abundance of good fresh water.

Already big corporates and the rich are sorting themselves out. Tsogo Sun are building their own desalination so that paying guests can bath like there is no tomorrow. Others will truck water in from private companies. Money can make nearly any problem go away which will further divide rich and poor.

Large-scale desalination is not cheap, but could easily be funded in public private partnerships as they achieved in Israel, as per the Carte Blanche segment a few weeks ago. 

Per that segment, Israel faced the same water crisis ten years ago. They quickly realised that aquifers and small-scale desalination was not going to fix the problem and decided to bite the bullet and build large-scale desalination plants. The result? Ten years later there is more than enough water for everyone and the price of water is still affordable. 

Why do we not learn from history?

Even if the price per litre of water was doubled or tripled, most Capetonians would happily cough up if it meant keeping the taps on and allowing for pre-water restriction lifestyles.

People are already spending far more on water devices and the economy will lose far more when the taps are turned off.

Even if the rains return and we have an over-abundance of water, so what. We can then really go to town with agriculture expansion and even assist other provinces that are in need and do not have a coastline to draw from. It can also supply the poor with more water and enable water-based businesses to thrive.

As the Chinese proverb goes, "The best time to plant an oak tree was twenty years ago. The second-best time is today."

Please let those with the wherewithal to make this happen sit down and make it happen.

http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/the-solution-to-cape-towns-water-crisis-is-obvious-but-it-will-cost-us-20180212" rel="nofollow - http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/the-solution-to-cape-towns-water-crisis-is-obvious-but-it-will-cost-us-20180212



-------------


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 11:59am
Climate change or the great Hoax,   delusion = call it what you like.

We bring in 300000 new settlers every year and don't cater for their needs.

   Pipe water from the North ,   Build Dams .   

   Flannery will have all the answers=      More decalination plants.


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 12:08pm
Wasn't Mr Abbott going to dam the Nth Qld rivers and pipe water to the southern capitals?

What happened, did he forget to do it or just another hollow Lib election lie promise?


Tony Abbott's dam solution for flooded rivers


TONY Abbott will develop a plan to build a series of dams around the nation, as part of the Coalition's policy platform for the next election.

The policy is aimed at reducing the impact of floods and boosting food security.

The Opposition Leader yesterday told The Australian he would announce a taskforce of senior Coalition frontbenchers charged with preparing a dam plan within 12 months. The plan would include potential locations for new dams and would build on the $500 million the Coalition promised at the last election to make water more available. "I just think it's a bit odd in a country with as many water issues that we've got that there have been virtually no dams built in the last two decades," Mr Abbott said yesterday.

The Australian(so you know it was trueWink)

7-1-2011



-------------


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 12:20pm
tell us pt....could it be like barnett in wa, who wanted to build a canal from the kimberlyes to perth, but couldnt get the support.

pt your into research, tell us why it didnt happen...dont leave it hanging.


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 12:23pm
Just another bad faith corrupt Liberal govt Isaac. They should have spent some of the enormous royalties from the mineral boom, the biggest boom in history

-------------


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 12:34pm
Or better still do what Norway did and set up a sovereign wealth fund that invests in infrastructure projects. Their's, as badly managed as it is accused of being, still has 1 Trillion dollars in it, a country one fifth our population. Mr Howard in his wisdom gave all ours away in tax cuts and concessions to the wealthy class. Vandalism

-------------


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 1:44pm
CNNPT, or Mr Incredible (can't decide for now), you know that these projects are impossible.

Just like the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, which has billions of dollars that they can't get out the door to help people, because they are blocked by the ALP/Green coalition, who wont allow them to use the money because it will adversely effect virtue signalling SJWs in inner city Melbourne, who think drinking water only comes from bottles anyway ...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!


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 1:50pm
I am not the one who promised them, your man Tones did. I think the desal is the best option as a backup, and we have them in southern states thanks to progressive thinking govts. I am glad you agreeThumbs Up

-------------


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 1:53pm
thanks to *gullible govts.

-------------
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!


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:34pm
yea pt, perth has a few desal plants installed, makes up a large part of our water supply, even into under ground storage. dont rely on dams at all.

thanks to the forward thinking of liberal premier barnett.




Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:38pm

We don't think about water until the tap is turned off

On WA Afternoons with Gillian O'Shaughnessy

  • Share
  • http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fradio%2Fperth%2Fprograms%2Fwa-afternoons%2Fwater-crisis%2F9408302&t=How%20Perth%20faced%20up%20to%20its%20water%20woes" rel="nofollow - http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=How%20Perth%20faced%20up%20to%20its%20water%20woes%20http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fradio%2Fperth%2Fprograms%2Fwa-afternoons%2Fwater-crisis%2F9408302" rel="nofollow - mailto:?subject=How%20Perth%20faced%20up%20to%20its%20water%20woes&body=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fradio%2Fperth%2Fprograms%2Fwa-afternoons%2Fwater-crisis%2F9408302" rel="nofollow -
  • http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/radio/local_perth/audio/201802/acg-2018-02-07-water-crisis.mp3" rel="nofollow -  Download (4.94 MB)
  • MP3 available 4.94 MB

Cape Town has been making headlines for the wrong reasons recently and people around the world have been horrified by the prospect of the water being turned off as locals deal with an extreme water crisis. Rapid population growth, extended drought and limited water storage are some of the factors contributing to the situation residents now face.

According to Dr Ian Wright, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Science at Western Sydney University, there are some parallels between Perth and Cape Town in regard to climate but Perth dodged a bullet by turning to desalination and groundwater.

Ian says Perth is Australia's most water stressed capital city and Cape Town could learn much from the way the West Australian city responded.

Duration: 10min 47sec


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:43pm
but didnt rudd give away our savings to all, when he came into power? only for it to flow to china anyway?
you could always move to china pt if you are so dissatisfied with australia......


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:47pm
I will  just wait till China gets here thanks Isaac....shouldn't be long eh?

-------------


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:52pm
Originally posted by Passing Through Passing Through wrote:

Just another bad faith corrupt Liberal govt Isaac. They should have spent some of the enormous royalties from the mineral boom, the biggest boom in history

the money was spent pt, is why labor is squealing now. 

and also eastern states are doing ok via gst distribution payments. 


Posted By: Isaac soloman
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 2:53pm
sure you are not a bot?


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 4:18pm
Originally posted by Isaac soloman Isaac soloman wrote:

but didnt rudd give away our savings to all, when he came into power? only for it to flow to china anyway?
you could always move to china pt if you are so dissatisfied with australia......

Rudd's stimulus payments whether they be $600 cheques or school halls or pink batts were one off payments to stimulate the economy, the Howard super concession ant tax cut gifts to the wealthy were structural and we are still paying $30-40B every year to maintain


-------------


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2018 at 8:43pm
You must admit you didn't support many Abbott proposals.
You ran him out of town.    As you did to the LNP Qld Premier and now Donald Trump.
   Your fault PT we have no water.   ( Coming from decalination plants )


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:32am
I like to think I was on the right side of history and at the pointy end of  running Tones out of office maxie, but I was persuaded by our mutual friend Scamanda in an ancient but fabulous thread, that damming has some merit and gave him a pass on that. I think Scamanda wrote the book on extremely obscure watercourses in central Qld so we had to defer to his expertiseSmile

-------------


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 12:34pm
If damming was evil, God would never have created beavers. (do your best with that one macca!)

-------------
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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 1:54pm
Originally posted by VOYAGER VOYAGER wrote:

I have said it before, and I will say it again.

The planet has been cooling down and warming up, long before humans existed, so yes global warming is happening. 

Is it the fault of humans? No.

Does human activity accelerate global warming? Perhaps.

Does global warming have any effect on climate change? Yes.

Is climate change more adverse to human populations, than global warming? Yes.

Why? Because if you have severe droughts, and extreme floods during your food growing periods, your ability to feed everyone is lost.

Is climate change reversible? No. Once you have a region of your country which is effected by prolonged, and extreme conditions, it is just about impossible to regain that productive land.

Should governments do something about climate change? What an idea. In Australia for instance you could develop a network of man made waterways, which divert flood waters to catchment facilities, and then pipe the water to areas which are drought prone.

This idea is not new. My home town of Goulburn, had some of the harshest water restriction in the country during the early part of this century. We now have water piped from a river which is feed by coastal waters to our east, so the water needs to be treated, but a virtually non stop supply of water, and since the pipeline has been operating in late 2013, our water supply has not dropped under 75%, and it is currently at 95% 

The government just needs to understand what will happen to Australia and actually do something about the issue, but I think there is more chance of hell freezing over, than that happening!

As far as the greens go, they are the modern day Arab terrorists from the 1970's, who hijacked planes and kidnapped those who they thought should be punished. People, who think fear, lies, exaggeration and doomsday statements and actions, will get people to start supporting them.

Good luck with that!   

You came unstuck with your first two statements Voyager, which show total ignorance of even the basic science, but the sweeping statements in your last par are an indictment of your own ignorance. Global warming isn't primarily about fresh water availability although anything which might shake the complacency out of a naval-gazing non-reader is a plus I guess.

The author of the thread has had his head up his @rse for a very long time. Apparently he still hasnt come to grips with the myriad non-Green, conservative governments throughout the world and the numerous businesses and business leaders who believe the issue is important enough to take serious action.

He also hasn't a clue about the numerous spinoffs - energy efficiency and conservation being just two - which have been brought about, at least in part, by climate science advice. Farmers and businesses have embraced the science (even if they don't think warming can be turned around significantly) 

The reason for his ignorance is obvious - he prefers proffering his own opinion to reading, but for obvious reasons you won't find him on climate science related forums. 

The choice is there. There are thousands of credible scientific and economic reports, commentaries and forums available for anyone interested in lifting the veil on their own ignorance.


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 2:13pm
Whatever be the case ,I believe, the unknown question of climate change is well down the list of importance in our ever changing World of today.
However ,   The Climate change people are destroying Australia's economy at a frightening rate.
When building up the intelligence of the so called science , never lose sight of the Name Tim Flannery.   Remember = "It wont rain again"   Build decalination plants.
I've seen a few summers ....   Cyclical as they are, but I see NO change in my lifetime.
Why is Australia bumping it's head against the wall with 24 million people when the Billions of China , India , The USA etc are the ones to benefit.
When the brains sort out climate change , maybe they can tell us all about Religion and the Gods.   >   Both are similar questions.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 3:19pm
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Whatever be the case ,I believe, the unknown question of climate change is well down the list of importance in our ever changing World of today.
However ,   The Climate change people are destroying Australia's economy at a frightening rate.
When building up the intelligence of the so called science , never lose sight of the Name Tim Flannery.   Remember = "It wont rain again"   Build decalination plants.
I've seen a few summers ....   Cyclical as they are, but I see NO change in my lifetime.
Why is Australia bumping it's head against the wall with 24 million people when the Billions of China , India , The USA etc are the ones to benefit.
When the brains sort out climate change , maybe they can tell us all about Religion and the Gods.   >   Both are similar questions.

Who are they and what evidence is there of your claims Macca? Plenty of economic assessment suggests those nations which have prepared for warming are reaping the benefits or at the least not suffering as much from the consequences. 

We've already covered your furphy about desal plants but I'm interested in why you keep regurgitating it. The basic tenet of propagandists is to make false statements (or statements with a tiny bit of truth and a lot of exaggerated nonsense) and keep repeating them but I'm not sure what your driver is.

It's more than ironic that the thread author would turn to scientists (albeit mostly unqualified retired scientists who have been rebuffed previously for pseudo-science) after claiming they're all incompetent and part of a global conspiracy. It's possible his ideological blindness results from too much 'self-love' as a child because his comments on all manner of topics show definite characteristics of a complete w@nker.

  https://www.skepticalscience.com/NASA-climate-denialist-letter.html" rel="nofollow - https://www.skepticalscience.com/NASA-climate-denialist-letter.html


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 3:46pm
I refrained from making a claim by commencing with =   Whatever.
Then reverted to facts.   Don't you use electricity ? .
Tim Flannery is our own total failure. Great example.
Desal . Plants are still there , costing Billions , doing nothing.
The Gov of the USA have pizzed off the hoax.    They are better equipped
than we are to Analyse such matters. They put a man on the moon.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 4:26pm
I've previously pointed out that your linking of climate scientists with desals is rubbish Macca.  Water security, and political decisions by both Lib and Labor state govts, coming towards the end of a very long drought were what drove their construction. Given our history they may in fact turn out to be an invaluable asset in the future.

Cost-wise, solar and wind electricity is about as cheap as it gets Macca. "The market" (as fcuked up as it is), its regulator and their rules of operation; predatory pricing (heard of gold plating assets I presume?); undervaluation and lack of control over national petroleum assets; and political stupidity/ideology are primarily to blame for current high energy prices. No other nation with as much natural energy availability would be so stupid as to operate in the way we do. At the very least it's a huge and unnecessary cost to business.

Using the USA as a model is far from convincing. They run multiple trillion dollar deficits on the basis that they're too big to be allowed to fail. Irrespective many USA states and very big businesses have simply ignored Trump on climate.


Posted By: oneonesit
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 5:09pm
Not hard to tell the racing schedules a bit light on today. We are normally not that lucky to get your attention down here in the bowels 3BM.  

-------------
Refer ALP Election Promises


Posted By: Gay3
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 5:56pm
Racing schedules are irrelevant when he spots one of my rare posts in the bowels LOL Or is that the Judge? Confused maybe both Big smile


-------------
Wisdom has been chasing me but I've always outrun it!


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:20pm
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

If damming was evil, God would never have created beavers. (do your best with that one macca!)


I'll leave that one alone Doc.

I often thought I was a type of beaver.

Having spent so much time looking after me nuts.


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:27pm
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

I refrained from making a claim by commencing with =   Whatever.
Then reverted to facts.   Don't you use electricity ? .
Tim Flannery is our own total failure. Great example.
Desal . Plants are still there , costing Billions , doing nothing.
The Gov of the USA have pizzed off the hoax.    They are better equipped
than we are to Analyse such matters. They put a man on the moon.

macca - the states arent any better equipped than us to analyse climate change. They just have a business man running the country that thinks its bad for business. 3BM eloquently explained that it can be quite the opposite for business.  Trump has declared war on the environment and decency. As long as big business is making money he doesnt give a flying fark about anything else


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:45pm
Originally posted by marble marble wrote:

Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

I refrained from making a claim by commencing with =   Whatever.
Then reverted to facts.   Don't you use electricity ? .
Tim Flannery is our own total failure. Great example.
Desal . Plants are still there , costing Billions , doing nothing.
The Gov of the USA have pizzed off the hoax.    They are better equipped
than we are to Analyse such matters. They put a man on the moon.


macca - the states arent any better equipped than us to analyse climate change. They just have a business man running the country that thinks its bad for business. 3BM eloquently explained that it can be quite the opposite for business.  Trump has declared war on the environment and decency. As long as big business is making money he doesnt give a flying fark about anything else


When the Climate change experts can tell me who created life.

I will definately listen to their "pie in the sky " reasoning on climate change, Global Warming , The Ice Age, Extreme weather events etc etc.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:50pm
Not just Trump MARBLE.The good ol boys are captives of the petro billionaires (the Koch boros will be going straight to Hell, if it exists) and their ranks contain numerous science (not just climate science) deniers.

There are many men and women of "faith" in the ranks though - and they show just how important it is to them by denying people basic medical attention,  and ensuring that the rich get wealthier and are given as soft a ride wrt taxation law and pursuit as is possible - for example. 

There are far too many similar issues to list here although one worth mentioning is the new con law overriding state law regarding carrying of concealed firearms. With any luck a few of the GOBs and NRA members will be on the receiving end of that piece of fwitted logic - that's the only way they will see reason, innocent members of the public are nothing more than irrelevant collateral damage.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 7:56pm
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

 
When the Climate change experts can tell me who created life.

I will definately listen to their "pie in the sky " reasoning on climate change, Global Warming , The Ice Age, Extreme weather events etc etc.

Not in their remit or area of expertise.

Nothing pie in the sky about (most) science Macca but they, I, and reason, can't make anyone open their minds let alone ACTUALLY do some reading on a topic they seem super-keen to add their usually ignorant and often fwitted opinions to. I call it wilful ignorance - which is inexcusable in this day and age. 


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 9:24pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Originally posted by VOYAGER VOYAGER wrote:

I have said it before, and I will say it again.

The planet has been cooling down and warming up, long before humans existed, so yes global warming is happening. 

Is it the fault of humans? No.

Does human activity accelerate global warming? Perhaps.

Does global warming have any effect on climate change? Yes.

Is climate change more adverse to human populations, than global warming? Yes.

Why? Because if you have severe droughts, and extreme floods during your food growing periods, your ability to feed everyone is lost.

Is climate change reversible? No. Once you have a region of your country which is effected by prolonged, and extreme conditions, it is just about impossible to regain that productive land.

Should governments do something about climate change? What an idea. In Australia for instance you could develop a network of man made waterways, which divert flood waters to catchment facilities, and then pipe the water to areas which are drought prone.

This idea is not new. My home town of Goulburn, had some of the harshest water restriction in the country during the early part of this century. We now have water piped from a river which is feed by coastal waters to our east, so the water needs to be treated, but a virtually non stop supply of water, and since the pipeline has been operating in late 2013, our water supply has not dropped under 75%, and it is currently at 95% 

The government just needs to understand what will happen to Australia and actually do something about the issue, but I think there is more chance of hell freezing over, than that happening!

As far as the greens go, they are the modern day Arab terrorists from the 1970's, who hijacked planes and kidnapped those who they thought should be punished. People, who think fear, lies, exaggeration and doomsday statements and actions, will get people to start supporting them.

Good luck with that!   

You came unstuck with your first two statements Voyager, which show total ignorance of even the basic science, but the sweeping statements in your last par are an indictment of your own ignorance. Global warming isn't primarily about fresh water availability although anything which might shake the complacency out of a naval-gazing non-reader is a plus I guess.

The author of the thread has had his head up his @rse for a very long time. Apparently he still hasnt come to grips with the myriad non-Green, conservative governments throughout the world and the numerous businesses and business leaders who believe the issue is important enough to take serious action.

He also hasn't a clue about the numerous spinoffs - energy efficiency and conservation being just two - which have been brought about, at least in part, by climate science advice. Farmers and businesses have embraced the science (even if they don't think warming can be turned around significantly) 

The reason for his ignorance is obvious - he prefers proffering his own opinion to reading, but for obvious reasons you won't find him on climate science related forums. 

The choice is there. There are thousands of credible scientific and economic reports, commentaries and forums available for anyone interested in lifting the veil on their own ignorance.

It's got nothing to do with Climate stupidWink ... you seriously over estimate your "credible scientists" and your "governments around the world" ... but mostly your self.

Ironically, you mention the true culprits - businesses and business leaders - who are sucking the "governments around the world" - ie the tax paying citizens, since governments have no money - dry, making them pay for unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies. Especially when any half intelligent person realises that these technologies will eventually develop, and become practical and affordable, whether necessary or not.

So does this mean that our Mr Turnbull, whom you have already derided as a spineless fool, is now a genius? ... or is he just another example of the doe eyed sucker, mesmerised by the flashing lights and jingles, who had to be the first person on the block with a $5,000 mobile phone or a $20,000 big screen TV.

My question is simple.

Why does Australia need to be first adopter all of the costs and disruption of this crap, when it is acknowledged that it makes NO difference to the climate anyway? Confused




-------------
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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 9:43pm
Your inanity knows no bounds as we know but your ignorance is fast catching up. Australia hasn't been at the forefront of climate action, nor do people with actual knowledge of climate, energy and economics acknowledge anything like you suggest. Hardly surprising since most of your comments are pulled from where the sun don't shine.

What are these "unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies" you write of? 
Can only think you're referring to outdated dirty coal power stations which no-one wants to invest in? Can't be solar panels/farms or wind power because as anyone who has read more than the neocon manifesto (or even travelled) knows they've been supplying significant power in countries across the globe for years.

But don't be shy in sharing your secret now, I'm in need of a good belly laugh after reading some of your other comments.



Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 10:06pm
Good to see that you have realised that you will need to do much better with your insults, because your grasp of the facts is so feeble.Thumbs Up

There are 1,600 "outdated dirty coal power stations which no-one wants to invest in" being invested in around the world as we speak.

They are vital, since the power generated by the sun and wind is not reliable enough to deliver the energy needed to fabricate, deliver, build and commission wind mills and solar panels - let alone the impossibly expensive (to talk about) "batteries" that they rely on anyway.LOL 

How much did South Australians (I mean Australians who subsidise South Australia) spend on Diesel Generators and the fossil fuels to run them, in preparation for this "rrrrrenooouble" summer?Clap

Just what ARE you reading, apart from The Guardian and transcripts of the past decade of Q&A shows?Confused

So as a percentage, just how much total power generation world wide, does wind and solar account for? ... not really all that "significant" is it ... Ouch


-------------
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!


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2018 at 11:42pm
Voyager... I note you mention Goulburn ..    My parents came from the area ... I   played some hockey in the area in the 1950's .    Dad from Golspie   , via Teralga ,   other family   Crookwell .
I still have friends and contacts there ...     was close to Boxers Murt Gray--   Ray Smith ---   Bill Mitchell   ( died a few months ago )
   Kenmore & Gaol staff ( NO NO I wasn't locked up )
many a story of younger days in that area. ...?? any bells ring


Posted By: oneonesit
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 8:12am
Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Voyager... I note you mention Goulburn ..    My parents came from the area ... I   played some hockey in the area in the 1950's .    Dad from Golspie   , via Teralga ,   other family   Crookwell .
I still have friends and contacts there ...     was close to Boxers Murt Gray--   Ray Smith ---   Bill Mitchell   ( died a few months ago )
   Kenmore & Gaol staff ( NO NO I wasn't locked up )
many a story of younger days in that area. ...?? any bells ring
Talking about bells ringing Macca....I'm waiting for round 3 to start between 3bm & Dr E. Evenly graded - & both have an "almost" perfect record. Get the popcorn & dictionaries out - this sort of match up doesn't come along too often !

-------------
Refer ALP Election Promises


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 8:54am
Interesting timing around all of this.

Senate rejects Murray-Darling Basin Plan changes as Labor backs Greens, NSW Government prepares to withdraw

http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/" rel="nofollow - ABC Rural  
By national rural reporter  http://www.abc.net.au/news/brett-worthington/4725564" rel="nofollow - Brett Worthington  and  http://www.abc.net.au/news/caitlyn-gribbin/4592876" rel="nofollow - Caitlyn Gribbin

Updated about 10 hours ago

The Senate has voted to block the Federal Government's changes to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, which could jeopardise the whole agreement.

The Greens have successfully convinced Labor to help block changes to the plan, which would have reduced the amount of water being returned to the environment in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales.more....

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/senate-rejects-murray-darling-basin-changes/9447876" rel="nofollow - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/senate-rejects-murray-darling-basin-changes/9447876




-------------


Posted By: Passing Through
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 10:47am
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



-------------


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:00am
Originally posted by oneonesit oneonesit wrote:

Talking about bells ringing Macca....I'm waiting for round 3 to start between 3bm & Dr E. Evenly graded - & both have an "almost" perfect record. Get the popcorn & dictionaries out - this sort of match up doesn't come along too often !

Thanks 11. The ultimate insult for anyone capable of rational, adult, thought. 

Until he actually does some reading on topics he comments about he will always be a puerile dullard. As the old adage goes best to be thought a fool than open your mouth and confirm same. It's one thing to be informed but blinded by ideology, entirely another to avoid information, eschew fact AND let your prejudices override the few bits of grey matter which might be still working, more or less.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:21am
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Good to see that you have realised that you will need to do much better with your insults, because your grasp of the facts is so feeble.Thumbs Up

There are 1,600 "outdated dirty coal power stations which no-one wants to invest in" being invested in around the world as we speak.

They are vital, since the power generated by the sun and wind is not reliable enough to deliver the energy needed to fabricate, deliver, build and commission wind mills and solar panels - let alone the impossibly expensive (to talk about) "batteries" that they rely on anyway.LOL 

How much did South Australians (I mean Australians who subsidise South Australia) spend on Diesel Generators and the fossil fuels to run them, in preparation for this "rrrrrenooouble" summer?Clap

Just what ARE you reading, apart from The Guardian and transcripts of the past decade of Q&A shows?Confused

So as a percentage, just how much total power generation world wide, does wind and solar account for? ... not really all that "significant" is it ... Ouch

Energy supply and demand is a complex and nuanced topic, clearly far too complex for the likes of you to be waffling about on a forum - as your comments above so adequately demonstrate. Some poorer countries are indeed investing in coal generated power, esp those with ample reserves of the raw material. Good to see you get something right, sort of. Here's just one tiny bit of info on the current situation in China for example:

http://reneweconomy.com.au/china-halts-150-coal-fired-power-plants-84937/

But back to your original statement and my follow up comment. Once again a response seems to have eluded that steel trap of yours. Let me ask again:

What are these "unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies" you write of?  Further, how are they unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable? 



Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:34am
While you're giving those thought processes a workout, and after you've elaborated on your throw away line above, I'd be interested (okay that's not even vaguely true) in your take on the myriad "non-Green-Leftist" businesses and political parties which have embraced climate science and are moving forward on the basis of the knowledge generated. 

Presumably they aren't all also "liars" and aren't so naive as to be able to be duped by a UN/Green/Leftie conspiracy - a conspiracy you'd have us believe involves thousand s of reputable scientists worldwide who are, according to you, inventing "stuff" simply to keep themselves in jobs? Did I mention puerile rubbish before?


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 1:16pm
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


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 1:45pm
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

and I  thought reading was good for you - at least thats what told my kids


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 1:55pm
Originally posted by oneonesit oneonesit wrote:

Originally posted by maccamax maccamax wrote:

Voyager... I note you mention Goulburn ..    My parents came from the area ... I   played some hockey in the area in the 1950's .    Dad from Golspie   , via Teralga ,   other family   Crookwell .
I still have friends and contacts there ...     was close to Boxers Murt Gray--   Ray Smith ---   Bill Mitchell   ( died a few months ago )
   Kenmore & Gaol staff ( NO NO I wasn't locked up )
many a story of younger days in that area. ...?? any bells ring
Talking about bells ringing Macca....I'm waiting for round 3 to start between 3bm & Dr E. Evenly graded - & both have an "almost" perfect record. Get the popcorn & dictionaries out - this sort of match up doesn't come along too often !

LOL Don't take any silly odds about me winning anything!

I can't compete when they stick their fingers in their ears and go "Rrrreeeeeeee!"... and of course, don't forget ... "the science is settled"!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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 2:01pm
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


-------------
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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 2:05pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

While you're giving those thought processes a workout, and after you've elaborated on your throw away line above, I'd be interested (okay that's not even vaguely true) in your take on the myriad "non-Green-Leftist" businesses and political parties which have embraced climate science and are moving forward on the basis of the knowledge generated. 

Presumably they aren't all also "liars" and aren't so naive as to be able to be duped by a UN/Green/Leftie conspiracy - a conspiracy you'd have us believe involves thousand s of reputable scientists worldwide who are, according to you, inventing "stuff" simply to keep themselves in jobs? Did I mention puerile rubbish before?

Covered in previous posts ad nauseam ... try taking a beta blocker before you read my posts.


-------------
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!


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 2:10pm
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.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 2:17pm
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Good to see that you have realised that you will need to do much better with your insults, because your grasp of the facts is so feeble.Thumbs Up

There are 1,600 "outdated dirty coal power stations which no-one wants to invest in" being invested in around the world as we speak.

They are vital, since the power generated by the sun and wind is not reliable enough to deliver the energy needed to fabricate, deliver, build and commission wind mills and solar panels - let alone the impossibly expensive (to talk about) "batteries" that they rely on anyway.LOL 

How much did South Australians (I mean Australians who subsidise South Australia) spend on Diesel Generators and the fossil fuels to run them, in preparation for this "rrrrrenooouble" summer?Clap

Just what ARE you reading, apart from The Guardian and transcripts of the past decade of Q&A shows?Confused

So as a percentage, just how much total power generation world wide, does wind and solar account for? ... not really all that "significant" is it ... Ouch

Energy supply and demand is a complex and nuanced topic, clearly far too complex for the likes of you to be waffling about on a forum - as your comments above so adequately demonstrate. Some poorer countries are indeed investing in coal generated power, esp those with ample reserves of the raw material. Good to see you get something right, sort of. Here's just one tiny bit of info on the current situation in China for example:

http://reneweconomy.com.au/china-halts-150-coal-fired-power-plants-84937/

But back to your original statement and my follow up comment. Once again a response seems to have eluded that steel trap of yours. Let me ask again:

What are these "unreliable, unnecessary, unaffordable technologies" you write of?  Further, how are they unreliable, unnecessary and unaffordable? 


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



-------------
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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 2:28pm
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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 8:41pm
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: http://%20www.clickenergy.com.au/news-blog/12-countries-leading-the-way-in-renewable-energy/" rel="nofollow - 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" rel="nofollow - 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:  http://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html " rel="nofollow - https://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html 

"In a new report published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,  http://solar.gwu.edu/index_files/Resources_files/epstein_full%20cost%20of%20coal.pdf" rel="nofollow - 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:
http://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/" rel="nofollow - https://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/

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




Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 8:53pm
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.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 9:00pm
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


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 9:08pm
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


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 10:15pm
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.      
   


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:04pm
As promised here's one on the real cost of coal power - including infrastructure. Not the one I recall so I'll keep looking:
http://theconversation.com/australian-coal-v-renewables-how-much-will-it-cost-to-bring-electricity-to-indias-poor-55449" rel="nofollow - https://theconversation.com/australian-coal-v-renewables-how-much-will-it-cost-to-bring-electricity-to-indias-poor-55449

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  http://www.news.com.au/finance/small-business/electricity-price-rises-locked-in-from-july-1-2017/news-story/0bad2dcddc1a3040c4abbf07d25cb7fc" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/" rel="nofollow - 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  https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-infrastructure/energy/electricity-supply-prices-inquiry/public-forums" rel="nofollow - 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  https://www.energymadeeasy.gov.au/" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/gas-cartel-is-pushing-gas-prices-up-in-australia/news-story/61acc1864d54fb6eb4801c332e683fbd" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/dark-future-ahead-for-coalfired-power-in-australia/news-story/53919a9468f454de86d0c688354b9345" rel="nofollow - best way to bring down prices and stabilise the market .

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has  http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/chief-scientist-alan-finkel-responds-as-critics-continue-to-slam-energy-security-review/news-story/c22bc30d895fad2124c8dbc4ae505cf2" rel="nofollow - 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.”



Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:14pm
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. 


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 15 Feb 2018 at 11:53pm
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.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:13am
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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:14am
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:
http://theconversation.com/australian-coal-v-renewables-how-much-will-it-cost-to-bring-electricity-to-indias-poor-55449" rel="nofollow - https://theconversation.com/australian-coal-v-renewables-how-much-will-it-cost-to-bring-electricity-to-indias-poor-55449

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  http://www.news.com.au/finance/small-business/electricity-price-rises-locked-in-from-july-1-2017/news-story/0bad2dcddc1a3040c4abbf07d25cb7fc" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/" rel="nofollow - 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  https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-infrastructure/energy/electricity-supply-prices-inquiry/public-forums" rel="nofollow - 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  https://www.energymadeeasy.gov.au/" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/gas-cartel-is-pushing-gas-prices-up-in-australia/news-story/61acc1864d54fb6eb4801c332e683fbd" rel="nofollow - 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  http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/dark-future-ahead-for-coalfired-power-in-australia/news-story/53919a9468f454de86d0c688354b9345" rel="nofollow - best way to bring down prices and stabilise the market .

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has  http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/chief-scientist-alan-finkel-responds-as-critics-continue-to-slam-energy-security-review/news-story/c22bc30d895fad2124c8dbc4ae505cf2" rel="nofollow - 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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:30am
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: http://%20www.clickenergy.com.au/news-blog/12-countries-leading-the-way-in-renewable-energy/" rel="nofollow - 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" rel="nofollow - 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:  http://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html " rel="nofollow - https://skepticalscience.com/true-cost-of-coal-power.html 

"In a new report published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,  http://solar.gwu.edu/index_files/Resources_files/epstein_full%20cost%20of%20coal.pdf" rel="nofollow - 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:
http://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/" rel="nofollow - https://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/

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!


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 7:05am
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


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 11:39am
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.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:07pm
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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:08pm
... 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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:20pm
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?


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 1:40pm
"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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 9:44pm
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.

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook44p/EnergyPrices" rel="nofollow - https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook44p/EnergyPrices

Here's another from one of your other fav sources The Courier Fail which looks at Qld prices. 
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/a-guide-to-why-electricity-prices-have-soared/news-story/9f432f26ff9a7a8b2fe550a6f8790728?nk=192d5a4d32d8fcb5df7477c65720923e-1518775695" rel="nofollow - http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/a-guide-to-why-electricity-prices-have-soared/news-story/9f432f26ff9a7a8b2fe550a6f8790728?nk=192d5a4d32d8fcb5df7477c65720923e-1518775695

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%. 

Gold-Plated Electricity Networks Are Why Energy Is So Expensive In Australia: http://https//www.buzzfeed.com/joshtaylor/network-costs-are-more-to-blame-for-australias-soaring?utm_term=.qkvMBBrZX#.gr7KqqOEM" rel="nofollow - ttps://www.buzzfeed.com/joshtaylor/network-costs-are-more-to-blame-for-australias-soaring?utm_term=.qkvMBBrZX#.gr7KqqOEM

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: 
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/25/business/energy-environment/germany-electricity-negative-prices.html" rel="nofollow - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/25/business/energy-environment/germany-electricity-negative-prices.html

Renewables and economy
http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/news/2016/January/irena-renewable-doubling-jobs-gdp-economics.html" rel="nofollow - https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/news/2016/January/irena-renewable-doubling-jobs-gdp-economics.html
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. 


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 11:40pm
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. 


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 12:45am
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.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:44am
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!


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:47am
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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 10:34am
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.


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 10:49am
Now I know why they have cemeteries in preference to crematoriums.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 1:09pm
Cemeteries are carbon sequestration Macca. What a f'ing waste of money that nonsense currently is - well the geological part at least.


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:07pm

[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.


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 2:58pm
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!


Posted By: Softy
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:03pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnso4nfdM9w%20" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnso4nfdM9w


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:10pm
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. 


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:38pm
The independent (roflmao) Minerals Council of Au  put renewable subsidies at $1.8B in 2016, while other reports have put coal subsidies at at least twice that - not including most of the externalities you continue to ignore

The MCA's response? 
"Australian government funding and tax breaks for exploration are not subsidies but legitimate tax deductions for business. " Hair splittingly hilarious if it wasn't so blatantly ludicrous.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-11/coal-oil-and-gas-companies-receive-4-billion-dollar-in-subsidie/5881814" rel="nofollow - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-11/coal-oil-and-gas-companies-receive-4-billion-dollar-in-subsidie/5881814

Last week, a study commissioned by the Minerals Council claimed that  http://www.minerals.org.au/news/the_high_cost_of_renewable_energy_subsidies" rel="nofollow - renewable energy in Australia was the beneficiary of huge subsidies .

Large-scale renewable projects, it claimed, were on the receiving end of $1.8 billion in direct subsidies last year alone. That's a claim rejected as simplistic and incorrect by those in the renewables industry.

Whatever the number, there is no doubt that renewable energy has been on the receiving end of vast subsidy handouts both for large scale and home generation here and around the globe.

But it's equally true that, in the absence of a carbon price, high-polluting industries have been getting a free ride, not only by avoiding the cost of damage to the environment and the planet, as the science overwhelmingly points to, but through the damage to the health of countless millions of people.

It's also worth noting that every Australian coal-fired power plant was built with taxpayer money. As were the electricity distribution systems. And while many since have been sold to private interests, the sales processes have thrown up some interesting numbers.

When the NSW government sold its electricity generation assets for $1.5 billion, the deal was hailed a breakthrough. But the Tamberlin Inquiry in 2011 discovered about  http://www.dpc.nsw.gov.au/announcements/special_commission_of_inquiry_into_electricity_transactions" rel="nofollow - $4 billion worth of taxpayer subsidies to the generators in the form of cheap long-term coal contracts [goodness me, how did the MCA commissioned report overlook things like this? Pure accident I'm sure]

Coal-fired generators also use huge amounts of water, much of which — unlike farmers — is gifted to them. Then, of course, there are the would-be new coal miners up in the Carmichael Basin — most notably the Adani family — with their hands out for about $1 billion in taxpayer-funded infrastructure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All very well known and much discussed facts which once again you appear to know nothing about. There's plenty more analysis of fossil fuel subsidies if your brain could only overcome your prejudice.



Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 4:46pm
For the benighted and lazy here's a picture :




Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 8:31pm
Good job reading!Star ... you're getting warmer, now apply the maths ... I'll check back later. 

-------------
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!


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 9:12pm
Make sure you pull your pants up on your way out.  Wait till you get home to check your jocks for those mythical 700% figs .

As the theatrical sayings go - the fat lady has sung and the curtain has come down on your illustrious career as an expert commentator LOL in climate change, energy prices, renewables, coal and economics. The village which lost its idiot can finally relax, we've sent them your details.

Given the love you have for your own ignorant opinion no doubt the forum will have to humour you from time to time. If I may make a suggestion perhaps the tea leaves will do a better job next time. At least when exposed the stench of your stupidity won't be quite as bad. You could try Halal meat, or at least give your intestine a rest and lay off the offal for a while.

It's not all bad news though. Afaik Dunning Kruger Effect and HUAS can be cured in most cases. Can't same the same for late stage ideological blindness unfortunately. Small steps as they say.


Posted By: oneonesit
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 9:19pm
I'll make it easy - we'll call it a draw . Cant get much fairer than that !

-------------
Refer ALP Election Promises


Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 17 Feb 2018 at 9:34pm
Call it whatever you like. 

I'd call the thread's premise, and its initiator's contributions, a steaming pile of excrement. Or to use the words of the wonderfully eloquent John Birmingham - a gelati sundae with a rancid cherry on top.


Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2018 at 12:23am
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Call it whatever you like. 

I'd call the thread's premise, and its initiator's contributions, a steaming pile of excrement. O<span style="font-size: small;">r to use the words of the wonderfully eloquent John Birmingham - </span><span style="font-size: small; color: rgb29, 29, 29;">a gelati sundae with a rancid cherry on top.</span>


   Don't lose sight of the fact,   if you make claims that you can't prove beyond doubt are factual , they become false ideas.
   A false idea is a delusion.        >   I would hate to see you in a straight jacket , wearing a spit hood TBM .      


Posted By: Dr E
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2018 at 2:52am
Originally posted by 3blindmice 3blindmice wrote:

Make sure you pull your pants up on your way out.  Wait till you get home to check your jocks for those mythical 700% figs .

As the theatrical sayings go - the fat lady has sung and the curtain has come down on your illustrious career as an expert commentator LOL in climate change, energy prices, renewables, coal and economics. The village which lost its idiot can finally relax, we've sent them your details.

Given the love you have for your own ignorant opinion no doubt the forum will have to humour you from time to time. If I may make a suggestion perhaps the tea leaves will do a better job next time. At least when exposed the stench of your stupidity won't be quite as bad. You could try Halal meat, or at least give your intestine a rest and lay off the offal for a while.

It's not all bad news though. Afaik Dunning Kruger Effect and HUAS can be cured in most cases. Can't same the same for late stage ideological blindness unfortunately. Small steps as they say.

Typical ... good reader, but failing in simple maths.Ouch

Here's a hint ... how much energy does wind and solar generate (when the wind is blowing and the sun is out!) compared with coal, in this country ... when you have that answer, and the other data you have, ask Mr Incredible to help you do the maths ... he actually knows the answer, but he just hates to share bad news.LOL

Listen, I'll let you in on a little secret ... I'm just as big a fan of science fiction as the next socially awkward geek living under the stairs at his mother's house drooling over posters of Jeri Ryan and Gillian Anderson, and I would love to believe the Climate Alarmists, but really, their consistent failure to ever come up with a prediction or a model that actually comes true ... well, let's just say if they made a movie about it, using all of the data that they have relied upon, it would make "Sharknado" 1, 2 and 3 look like an award winning Nat Geo Science Doco series. They simply must do better ... when they do, then maybe the hysterical rush to EXPENSIVE, UNPROVEN, UNRELIABLE technologies might just be justified.

On a positive note, your insults are well researched and constructed, and far superior to anything that Whale ever served up, but on the flip side of that, I must say that I have far more respect for him than I would for some pompous, pseudo intellectual soft cock who just wont say what they mean.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!


Posted By: marble
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2018 at 7:43am
doc you remind me of the old proverb none are so blind as those who cannot see. The most deluded people are those that choose to ignore what they already know.
if im correct you do believe the planet is warming only that its a natural cycle.
not so according to scientists - i'm sure some scientists lean to the left but not all. 
The fact about this warming period is that it happening at a time when the planet should be cooling. The other fact is that the earth has never warmed this quickly. 
The warming funnily enough coinciding with industrialisation and massive forest clearing.




Posted By: oneonesit
Date Posted: 18 Feb 2018 at 9:57am
Yes that's right Marble - the deniers are the deluded ones. Ever thought that it may be the other way around ? You cannot argue that the whole subject has become a massive global issue - & that many , many businesses /groups of people /individuals are making a hell of a lot of money out of it. Reputations, continued money streams & companies bottom lines rely on it . So the first problem for me is even if evidence became available today to "prove" it was all cobblers it would take a long time for those I speak of to accept it. All of a sudden I suspect they would become the "deniers". Which maybe what's actually going on right now with many of the doomsday predictions of a few years back not readily on the horizon.
The second real issue I have is even if it is true that we are the root cause for global warming I question its real impact. Yes there will be slight increases in sea levels that will impact some land areas, some animal/plant species "may" suffer & some areas will become slightly hotter/colder. So what ? - all that has occurred thousands of times since year dot on this planet - & for the very vast majority their were no humans in sight. So I am pretty sure we can adapt as required. We actually have the advantage of managing the change. And whose to say their wont be as many winners as losers ? I mean all those freezing hell holes around the planet would love a bit more heat I would have thought.
 
The third issue is that its trendy to knock the deniers. Have a look at most of the Greenies on the bandwagon - that in itself should be enough for folk like (you assuming you are not one of them - juries out) to have a bit of a rethink. 3bm keeps going on about deniers being lazy & unable to educate themselves on the issue. Hope he's not suggesting that rabble have.


-------------
Refer ALP Election Promises



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2022 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net