“We might ask ourselves why much of the rest of the world is not seeing the same picture we are”, about the Government’s projection of climate doom if we Australians don’t just shut up and pay up in support of their plan to de-industrialise what is left of Australia’s economy.
The answer is simple. The people behind the ‘Renewables’ financial juggernaut in Australia receive much greater payola from the major promoter of the fear-mongering climate scam than do their equivalents other countries.
So who is that major promoter? Ask yourself - Cui Bono? The answer: All roads lead to Beijing. The CCP has simply bought up a veritable army of ‘Agents of Influence’ in the decision-making apparatus of the key Australian government and corporate bureaucracies - supplemented by a lesser number of naïve Useful Idiots in the media and academia.
Australia has substantially reduced emissions while many nations have shamelessly greenwashed their credentials.
This is most unfair. We should get some credit for doubling or tripling the price of power, trashing the property rights of farmers, bringing the grid to the point of collapse and funding a myriad of new government and quasi-government agencies dedicated to the task of increasing the cost of doing business.
Who would dare to calculate the deadweight cost of merely counting the emissions?
Excellent analysis! Unfortunately, Australia seems hell-bent on following the UK’s lead into poverty and irrelevance in the self-righteous quest to Net Zero. Your only hope is to follow America’s lead and vote the CO2 Climate Cult out of office.
Another brilliant essay Mike …telling it as it is! Seeing this play out in my country with my own eyes and paying for electricity through the nose which until the last the last 10 years was perhaps the cheapest in the world is depressing. But, it’s only going to get worse at least until we feel more pain… which is insane as distinct to misfortune.
But why and for what? As I see it government policy is actually contributing to the release of more carbon emissions in the atmosphere not less. By not using our own coal and gas we are actually lowering demand, hence the cost of these resources for China and India to buy and consume - and much more than they otherwise would. And, what do they do with this abundant cheap energy, they waste much of it on non market driven boondoggles: ghost cities, highways to nowhere and its military. Let alone the energy used to power its industrial capacity with very little regard to the environment… very much sub standard to the environmental protection adopted in the West. And, India which is deemed to be a developing nation and hence has until 2070 to get to net zero ‘officially’ yet had the capacity to get to the moon 2 years ago. And, only last week proposed to build 1m homes in Australia. You can’t make this stuff up without sounding ridiculous but here we are! As the saying goes, ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.’ Not sure about the good intentions though!
This is an appropriate savaging of the parochial and politicised “independent” climate experts that all-too-often get an uncritical look by journalists.
From my point of view, it’s insane to think that *the* biggest global business and energy story over the past three years, being AI and the energy requirements, is totally ignored by the CSIRO’s GenCost report. Whenever we hear about Australia being being some sort of AI “powerhouse” it is done with the CSIRO being incapable of knowing what today’s data centre energy use is, let alone future demand, and how this can accommodated with intermittent energy generation.
As ever in business and politics, follow the money: there is a spigot of public cash being directed towards green initiatives. Regardless of how unproductive the investment might be, there is an entire nexus of business, lobbying, NGO and bureaucratic jobs and profit entirely reliant on government largesse. They have more incentive than anyone to keep this racket alive.
The destruction caused by the woke mind virus will sadly only be cured by the economic shock that ensues.
The Business for 75 (% by 2035) signatories smack of the same mindset of those elitists that signed an open letter for The Voice. That somehow they possess some moral
All BOM temperature and rainfall data MUST be the original recorded data, on the public record for all to access! They can take the ACORN 1, 2, and 3 and do what they like with it in their own time! They have no right and no statistical logic for messing with OUR data!
Well said Mike. So, where to from here? Next steps?
For my part, since (reportedly) the unreliables of wind & solar-PVs are supposedly cheaper nowadays (really? not reflected in my quarterly electricity bills), then surely it's time now for adoption of a sensible Energy Policy that's fair to all concerned, including the unreliables (of wind & solar-PVs) along the following lines...
A Sensible Energy Policy for Australia
Electricity is a fundamental service, vital to the functioning of Australia & indeed, any other first-world democracy. An effective energy policy must be affordable, reliable & consistently available 24/7. It should be straightforward & market driven. Designed with the consumer’s interests as the central focus, rather than being shaped by the priorities of the power generation industry.
In the absence of empirical evidence proving the case against CO2 (there isn’t any), the key elements of such a sensible Energy Policy should be built upon the following principles;
• Technology Agnostic: The policy should not favour any specific technology. All sources – fossil fuels, hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, wave energy, batteries & nuclear – should be considered viable options.
• Elimination of Subsidies & Discriminatory Legislation: All subsidies & laws that advantage or disadvantage any particular technology must be removed/repealed. The market, through the independent choices of power generators, should determine which technologies are used. A level playing field that’s fair to all.
• Guaranteed Service Standards: Power generation contracts awarded via AEMO auction (eg; xx GWs/best $price contracted a month in advance), must ensure a guaranteed 99.998% supply in keeping with established Quality of Service (QOS) obligations.
• Accountability Through Penalties: Power generators that fail to meet contractual & QOS obligations should face significant financial penalties, except in cases of force majeure due to natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods or bush fires.
• Environmental Restoration Bonds: Generators must pay a substantial upfront bond to cover the costs of environmental restoration, including the decommissioning & removing infrastructure & handling disposal or recycling (e.g., solar PV panels, wind turbine blades), similar to established practice within the mining industry by way of land restoration.
• Legislative Reform: Existing legislation – including the RET , LRET, SRES Safeguard Mechanism & the ban on nuclear power generation - must be repealed to create a truly level playing field.
If the power generating industry finds the principles associated with this proposed Energy Policy unpalatable, simply re-nationalize the industry & return it to whence it came i.e., the responsibility of respective State Govt’s.
Thank you Mike, this is a powerful and scathing report. The truth that you expose is frightening.
Is there any chance that you and Chris can get this reported in the mainstream media? Somehow, our so-called 'leadership' classes (political, bureaucracy and industry), need to be coerced into absorbing this gross reality, and of urgently effecting real change.
Ruthlessly savage and deservedly so of a mediocre political emasculated shell of the former public service.
Mike - you ask the question:
“We might ask ourselves why much of the rest of the world is not seeing the same picture we are”, about the Government’s projection of climate doom if we Australians don’t just shut up and pay up in support of their plan to de-industrialise what is left of Australia’s economy.
The answer is simple. The people behind the ‘Renewables’ financial juggernaut in Australia receive much greater payola from the major promoter of the fear-mongering climate scam than do their equivalents other countries.
So who is that major promoter? Ask yourself - Cui Bono? The answer: All roads lead to Beijing. The CCP has simply bought up a veritable army of ‘Agents of Influence’ in the decision-making apparatus of the key Australian government and corporate bureaucracies - supplemented by a lesser number of naïve Useful Idiots in the media and academia.
Hear hear
Australia has substantially reduced emissions while many nations have shamelessly greenwashed their credentials.
This is most unfair. We should get some credit for doubling or tripling the price of power, trashing the property rights of farmers, bringing the grid to the point of collapse and funding a myriad of new government and quasi-government agencies dedicated to the task of increasing the cost of doing business.
Who would dare to calculate the deadweight cost of merely counting the emissions?
https://www.flickerpower.com/index.php/search/categories/renewables/21-14-the-false-claims-about-net-zero-progress-overseas
And there is more.
https://www.amazon.com.au/s?k=Rafe+Champion&i=stripbooks&crid=GZ66NWUYZ193&sprefix=rafe+champion%2Cstripbooks%2C262&ref=nb_sb_noss
"Why unfair" if you are like me and think that it is all bull crap you shouldn't give a shit!
Christopher Booker's "The Real Global Warming Crisis" exposed the dubious doings of the IPCC and data fiddling with hockey sticks.
Great read. Thank you.
Excellent analysis! Unfortunately, Australia seems hell-bent on following the UK’s lead into poverty and irrelevance in the self-righteous quest to Net Zero. Your only hope is to follow America’s lead and vote the CO2 Climate Cult out of office.
Another brilliant essay Mike …telling it as it is! Seeing this play out in my country with my own eyes and paying for electricity through the nose which until the last the last 10 years was perhaps the cheapest in the world is depressing. But, it’s only going to get worse at least until we feel more pain… which is insane as distinct to misfortune.
But why and for what? As I see it government policy is actually contributing to the release of more carbon emissions in the atmosphere not less. By not using our own coal and gas we are actually lowering demand, hence the cost of these resources for China and India to buy and consume - and much more than they otherwise would. And, what do they do with this abundant cheap energy, they waste much of it on non market driven boondoggles: ghost cities, highways to nowhere and its military. Let alone the energy used to power its industrial capacity with very little regard to the environment… very much sub standard to the environmental protection adopted in the West. And, India which is deemed to be a developing nation and hence has until 2070 to get to net zero ‘officially’ yet had the capacity to get to the moon 2 years ago. And, only last week proposed to build 1m homes in Australia. You can’t make this stuff up without sounding ridiculous but here we are! As the saying goes, ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.’ Not sure about the good intentions though!
This is an appropriate savaging of the parochial and politicised “independent” climate experts that all-too-often get an uncritical look by journalists.
From my point of view, it’s insane to think that *the* biggest global business and energy story over the past three years, being AI and the energy requirements, is totally ignored by the CSIRO’s GenCost report. Whenever we hear about Australia being being some sort of AI “powerhouse” it is done with the CSIRO being incapable of knowing what today’s data centre energy use is, let alone future demand, and how this can accommodated with intermittent energy generation.
As ever in business and politics, follow the money: there is a spigot of public cash being directed towards green initiatives. Regardless of how unproductive the investment might be, there is an entire nexus of business, lobbying, NGO and bureaucratic jobs and profit entirely reliant on government largesse. They have more incentive than anyone to keep this racket alive.
The destruction caused by the woke mind virus will sadly only be cured by the economic shock that ensues.
The Business for 75 (% by 2035) signatories smack of the same mindset of those elitists that signed an open letter for The Voice. That somehow they possess some moral
superiority over the average Aussie.
Summary of Laframboise's book in case it helps:)
http://www.the-rathouse.com/2012/IPCC.html
The trap of models and other climate nonsense.
http://www.the-rathouse.com/2011/Paltridge-Climate-Caper.html
The campaign against nuclear power, a worldwide communist effort.
http://www.the-rathouse.com/2011/Grover-Power.html
Review of the policies of The Greens.
http://www.the-rathouse.com/2011/The-Greens.html
All BOM temperature and rainfall data MUST be the original recorded data, on the public record for all to access! They can take the ACORN 1, 2, and 3 and do what they like with it in their own time! They have no right and no statistical logic for messing with OUR data!
Well said Mike. So, where to from here? Next steps?
For my part, since (reportedly) the unreliables of wind & solar-PVs are supposedly cheaper nowadays (really? not reflected in my quarterly electricity bills), then surely it's time now for adoption of a sensible Energy Policy that's fair to all concerned, including the unreliables (of wind & solar-PVs) along the following lines...
A Sensible Energy Policy for Australia
Electricity is a fundamental service, vital to the functioning of Australia & indeed, any other first-world democracy. An effective energy policy must be affordable, reliable & consistently available 24/7. It should be straightforward & market driven. Designed with the consumer’s interests as the central focus, rather than being shaped by the priorities of the power generation industry.
In the absence of empirical evidence proving the case against CO2 (there isn’t any), the key elements of such a sensible Energy Policy should be built upon the following principles;
• Technology Agnostic: The policy should not favour any specific technology. All sources – fossil fuels, hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, wave energy, batteries & nuclear – should be considered viable options.
• Elimination of Subsidies & Discriminatory Legislation: All subsidies & laws that advantage or disadvantage any particular technology must be removed/repealed. The market, through the independent choices of power generators, should determine which technologies are used. A level playing field that’s fair to all.
• Guaranteed Service Standards: Power generation contracts awarded via AEMO auction (eg; xx GWs/best $price contracted a month in advance), must ensure a guaranteed 99.998% supply in keeping with established Quality of Service (QOS) obligations.
• Accountability Through Penalties: Power generators that fail to meet contractual & QOS obligations should face significant financial penalties, except in cases of force majeure due to natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods or bush fires.
• Environmental Restoration Bonds: Generators must pay a substantial upfront bond to cover the costs of environmental restoration, including the decommissioning & removing infrastructure & handling disposal or recycling (e.g., solar PV panels, wind turbine blades), similar to established practice within the mining industry by way of land restoration.
• Legislative Reform: Existing legislation – including the RET , LRET, SRES Safeguard Mechanism & the ban on nuclear power generation - must be repealed to create a truly level playing field.
If the power generating industry finds the principles associated with this proposed Energy Policy unpalatable, simply re-nationalize the industry & return it to whence it came i.e., the responsibility of respective State Govt’s.
Easy.
Thank you Mike, this is a powerful and scathing report. The truth that you expose is frightening.
Is there any chance that you and Chris can get this reported in the mainstream media? Somehow, our so-called 'leadership' classes (political, bureaucracy and industry), need to be coerced into absorbing this gross reality, and of urgently effecting real change.