Renewable energy

[wilful]

Ah! But a frog colony can stop a highway which speed transport along and saves on C02 gas.

Sounds like selective ecological protection.

I don't make the rules. But if it's the last or only frog population, that's not the same as a few dead birds.

I don.t like a whole lot of the alternatives as I have said before and turbines are another classic example of an inefficient alternative being subsidies to make us all feel good.

But this is simply wrong and a myth, as has been proven by basically all the economists time and time again. Even Dick fucking Warburton's RET review couldn't bodgy up the figures enough to say that they were expensive. Wind turbines, as part of the mix, not the entire mix, are cheap and effective. Sure they're more expensive in direct current dollars than coal, but full cost accounting blows that figure out of the water.

My perfect energy mix for Australia is nuclear 50%, wind 30%, solar thermal 15%, hydro 5%.

 

[Runner]

I think you might find the Europeans have a different view on costs and I think I posted it here awhile back.

Out of the above, a nice list, only one can provide long term baseload power and our out of date value systems stop us from using it.

 

[wilful]

Out of the above, a nice list, only one can provide long term baseload power and our out of date value systems stop us from using it.

Yeah but baseload isn't the be all and end all of a power system. We need it, sure, but it's not all we need. Nuclear is more expensive than wind or solar, that's why I don't have it at 100%.

 

[boyo]

You go on about subsidies, but you conveniently forget about the subsidies to the coal industry and to coal-fired power.

Queensland has realised that coal royalties gained are less than the cost of the infrastructure provided to the coal industry- hardly an anti-coal state government.

 

[Runner]

The subsidy for coal is cost effective as it provides power on demand for 100% baseload.

Paying a much higher subsidy to solar, wind etc that can't provide power on demand nor enough for baseload is the major point.

France has 80% nuclear and meets its green house gas limits easily.

 

[boyo]

Australia has 0% nuclear, so your point is irrelevant.

 

[Ruggo]

I once was pro nuclear in my view. Then I learnt more about it began questioning the legacy issue. It is the biggest polluter of all.

 

[boyo]

Nuclear energy is non-renewable, therefore doesn't belong in this thread.

 

[Runner]

Neither is coal, hydro -- will go if you believe Tim Flannery's predictions on rainfall. So the whole blog should just be about solar, thermal and wind.

 

[Ruggo]

Nuclear energy is non-renewable, therefore doesn't belong in this thread.

Well let's rename the thread sustainable energy and have a mature discussion about it.

 

[boyo]

Putting hydroelectric energy in the same group as coal demonstrates the ridiculousness of your argument.

 

[boyo]

This is the type of business that should be encouraged to stay in Australia.

Germany's renewable energy incentives and regulations attracting Australian companies

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-28/australian-green-energy-company-forced-offshore/5849082

 

[Ruggo]

That's a good article Boyo. Germany is the classic example of a conservative country being able to adapt with the times.

We are so stuck on ideology that we are letting good R&D ans subsequent economic investment slip by.

It is very frustrating.

 

[boyo]

TA has nailed his colours to the mast in labelling the R.E.T. being all about electricity prices.
Climate policy hijacked by cost of living debate

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-...icy-hijacked-by-cost-of-living-debate/5847058

 

[Ruggo]

TA has nailed his colours to the mast in labelling the R.E.T. being all about electricity prices.
Climate policy hijacked by cost of living debate

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-...icy-hijacked-by-cost-of-living-debate/5847058

I feel a bit sorry for Ian McFarlane. I rate him but it is hard to saw like an Eagle when you are surrounded by Turkey's. I have no idea how he is going to take a good stance on the issue back to cabinet.

 

[Runner]

"However, we have seen subsidies and support schemes that have distorted the market.
"One controversial example is solar panels supported where the sun doesn't shine."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-28/australian-green-energy-company-forced-offshore/5849082

https://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR...the+Energiewende+and+international+trends.PDF

 

[boyo]

"Solar panels where the sum doesn't shine"? Wtf? What a ridiculous attestation.

All places have sunshine some of the time.

 

[wilful]

TA has nailed his colours to the mast in labelling the R.E.T. being all about electricity prices.
Climate policy hijacked by cost of living debate

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-...icy-hijacked-by-cost-of-living-debate/5847058

Yes but that's the most moronic thing of all. The RET will have LOWER prices for consumers over time. What he secretly wants/know is that the people who will do worse out of this are the multinational power companies. Not the consumers. It's the biggest scam. Tony Abbott wants people to pay more money to big businesses (and State owned monopolies), that is exactly what he wants. Scumbag.

 

[Runner]

"Solar panels where the sum doesn't shine"? Wtf? What a ridiculous attestation.

All places have sunshine some of the time.

Was taken form the article quoted in your above comment

 

[boyo]

Was taken form the article quoted in your above comment

One policy analyst said that. It's still a ridiculous attestation.