Blog Archives

Reality bites Labor Resources Minister as national electricity supply threatened

Climate activists perform what appears to be a cultic ritual at Parliament House, Canberra.

by TONY MOBILIFONITIS
AUSTRALIA’S new federal Labor government has been struck with a reality bug. According to the new Resources Minister Madeleine King, coal-fired power plants need to come back online to provide relief from the energy crisis gripping the east coast. 

This after Labor, the Greens and Teals ran their election campaign on “combatting the climate crisis”, “ending the climate wars” (no more debate on the climate change theory) and “transitioning to renewables”. Greens leader “Adam Bandit” even threatened not to support the government unless they pledge to stop all coal and gas developments. Bandt is a fool and yes, a bandit intent on impoverishing the Aussie economy by shutting down its major energy sources.

Bandt’s most recent contribution to the issue was this Tweet: “Gas corporations are holding us ransom. Gifting an essential service to big corporations has left us facing soaring prices just to keep the power on. We need a publicly-owned big build of solar, wind, batteries & storage. Starting right now.”

Bandt sees part of the problem but his solution is wishful thinking. Does he really think batteries like the one in South Australia are a solution to an energy crisis? That 150m/W battery provides a full-power electricity supply for a whole hour. It’s only advantages are that it fires up very quickly and can avert unexpected blackouts.

South Australia gets 800MW of electricity from gas, 210MW from its large-scale wind and solar farms and 600MW from rooftop solar panels.

Meanwhile Minister King threw out the surprise appeal a few days before a meeting of Commonwealth, state and territory energy ministers on June 8th to discuss the soaring gas and coal prices, brought about by the war in Ukraine and the idiotic US and EU attempts to punish Vladimir Putin by strangling their own gas and oil supplies from Russia.

But this war-driven energy crisis is not the first one. Back in the early 1970s there was one, driven by OPEC countries cutting production during the fourth Arab-Israeli war. OPEC was trying to force an Israeli withdrawal from Arab-Palestinian lands.

They were also trying to exercise some control over the Anglo-American oil cartel, which produced about 50% of petroleum in western countries in 1972 and controlled 85-90% of oil exports from developing countries. This same oil cartel funded the first Earth Day in 1970, thereby popularising the global environmental/population control movement with its central message of restricting use of resources i.e. creating more government and big corporate control over resources.

The cartel generated its huge profits from the difference between monopoly-driven low prices that oil was purchased at from developing exporter countries and relatively high petroleum product prices in importing countries. In other words, big business and geopolitical factors drove the “crisis”, not an actual shortage of energy.

And so it is now with the same old Anglo-EU-US business and political cartel, this time running a war against Russia, who they see as a threat to their desired unipolar world order with its US dollar reserve currency. Russia is directly challenging that state of affairs by trying to lay claim to Ukraine by force.

Another factor is the drive by globalists (primarily the World Economic Forum) to force the entire planet into a “great reset” or new world order. Their narrative employs the bogus climate scare campaign and the so-called transition to renewables. This transition demands the demonization of fossil fuels, which are relatively easy to extract and highly efficient because of their vastly higher energy density.

The globalists’ grand plan is to electrify or convert to hydrogen all transport while taking control of and limiting energy production in the name of “sustainability”. But the harsh reality, as pointed out by Scottish academic Robert Wilson PhD: “…90% of the planet’s 200 largest cities almost certainly cannot be powered predominantly by local renewable energy.”

Advocates of renewable energy like the Australia Institute repeatedly claim that renewables are now comparable or cheaper than fossil fuel electricity. But that only applies on sunny days and windy conditions. Coal, gas or oil-fired power stations produce electricity on demand for peak use periods, not when the weather suits.

Dr Wilson: “In fact, on the scale of most countries aggregate wind farm output can be assumed to have almost zero reliability. In this sense, every wind farm must have a fossil fuel power plant sitting in wait for when the wind does not blow.” He continues: “The lesson is reasonably clear; Britain and Germany’s aggregate wind farm output can be expected to go below 1% of total installed capacity with reasonable regularity.”

Solar is not much better, even if it does have a higher power density than windmill power. “Commercial solar photovoltaic panels typically average between 10 and 15% efficiency,” Dr Wilson notes.

The key factor separating fossil fuels from wind, solar and biofuels is power density, as expressed in Watts per square metre (W/m2). Wilson notes that typical generation of fossil fuel and nuclear electricity has a power density of at least an order of magnitude greater than that of renewable energy.

“Power densities are comfortably above 100W/m2 after accounting for mining etc. And conventional power plants often have power densites in excess of 1000/m2.” He cites the example of a small propane powered generator (3500W) which can be bought at a hardware store for a few hundred dollars. It provides in excess of 1000W/m2, which is far in excess of the power density of any conceivable new method of generating renewable energy.  

These physical economic realities are behind why the people who advise Australia’s Energy Minister suddenly saw the writing on the wall. No, renewables, although useful, do not have the ability to meet those peak demand periods such as the current polar weather across much of Australia.

Minister King told the ABC that outages of coal-fired power represented 30% of the Australian energy mix and operators needed “to get moving on fixing their plants right now.”

Former energy minister Angus Taylor told the ABC Australia had seen record levels of investment in household solar and renewables more generally and the highest levels of household solar in the world. But that solar power supply had to be matched with dispatchability which is why gas was crucial to balance the grid. 

The Western Australia government policy reserves 15 per cent of gas produced in the state for local consumption, which reportedly has spared WA from soaring gas prices.

“The gas reservation policy of Western Australia was a very great political struggle to introduce, it was very hard on the then state Labor government, and a lot of people lost a lot of political skin in that fight,” King said.

“It was also part of the design of the export industry — so it came in at the same time, and was also part of, the investment decisions of international investors into the WA gas production system. That kind of system is very hard to reverse engineer now on the east coast, [the] export market was developed without that in place, investment decisions were made without that restriction.”

So what is the lesson to be learned? Obviously we need national reserves of fossil fuel and probably another coal-fired power station to replace the one shut down by the lefty Labor loonies in Victoria and the one demolished in South Australia. Renewables should be seen as the stand-in source of power and made to work in tandem with the national grid, not against it.

And if you’re lucky enough to live on a sunny, windy property next to a creek, then good luck with your mini-hydro, solar panels and windmill.

Alinta says court wind farm ruling will have ‘dramatic’ and chilling effect on renewable energy investment

from ABC

Alinta says ‘there are not enough sites’ for the number of wind farms needed to meet Australia’s goals.(Supplied: APA)

One of Australia’s biggest renewable energy investors says a court’s decision to uphold complaints against a Victorian wind farm could have “dramatic” and chilling effects on the country’s transition away from fossil fuels.  

Alinta boss Jeff Dimery, whose company is one of Australia’s biggest private energy providers, said the ruling by Victoria’s Supreme Court would be a “shock” to companies planning to invest billions of dollars in new wind farms.

In its decision, the court backed claims brought against the 106MW Bald Hills wind farm in the south east of the state by neighbours who argued they were unable to sleep because of noise from the project.

Justice Melinda Richards ordered the project’s operators to switch off parts of the wind farm at night until the noise levels could be reduced to an acceptable level.

She also told the operators to pay aggrieved neighbours more than a quarter of a million dollars in costs and damages.

Mr Dimery said the decision would send “ripples” of doubt through the renewable energy industry across the country given the potential precedent it sets for other wind farms.

He said the longer-term implications were potentially significant, noting the ruling could scare away developers by making wind farms harder to build and less financially attractive. 

“It’s a disaster,” Mr Dimery said.

“This is a pretty dramatic outcome, I have to say.

“This court decision certainly changes the risk appetite for investors.

“I think there’ll be some fairly serious ramifications off the back of this.”

Net-zero goals ‘just got harder’

According to Mr Dimery, Australia was already facing a difficult tasking in building the amount of renewable energy needed to meet the country’s plans to become carbon neutral by 2050.

He said the Bald Hills decision was likely to make the job even harder and highlighted the need for governments and energy providers to ensure they get affected communities onside.

“You can set targets and say they’re achievable from an academic or technical point of view,” he said.

“But then we all live in the real world.

“In the real world for instance, a couple of weeks back there were a whole lot of tractors parked up in Spring Street in Melbourne in front of Parliament House, with farmers protesting about transmission lines being built in the west of Victoria to facilitate renewable energy zones.

A close-up of a stern-looking man wearing a suit.
Alinta chief executive Jeff Dimery says the court ruling will have major ramifications.(AAP: Darren England)

“We ourselves had a couple onshore wind projects on the east coast of Australia that were commercially feasible but unfortunately didn’t have community support to advance.

“And so we spent millions of dollars developing those projects and we had to walk away from them.

“What this Bald Hills decision highlights to me is the difficulty of the actual transition that we’re undertaking to reduce carbon emission from the stationary energy sector in Australia.”

Costs, bills inevitably to rise

For Mr Dimery, the ruling also underscored the cost pressures that would emerge as Australia accelerated its push away from coal- and gas-fired power plants towards renewable energy.

He said although wind and solar farms provided cheap electricity while they were producing, they were available less often than conventional plants.

On top of this, he said major and expensive upgrades to the national grid would be required to handle the extra renewable energy needed to meet Australia’s emissions targets.

Noting “there are not enough sites on land on the east coast to replace coal-fired generation” with wind farms, Mr Dimery said offshore wind projects were one of the only viable replacement options.

However, he said offshore wind farms were typically three times more expensive than onshore projects and this would eventually filter through to energy bills.

“I think the magnitude of what needs to be achieved has absolutely been underestimated,” he said.

“The narrative around what can be done and how it can be done, in my opinion, is being oversimplified to the community.

“There’s a misconception that bringing more and more renewable energy into the market will reduce power prices over time.”

Infrastructure Capital Group, which owns Bald Hills, said it was “absorbing the judgement and its implications”.

Nicholas Aberle from the Clean Energy Council said the industry took turbine noise “very seriously”.

Dr Aberle also noted that a new set of laws and guidelines had been developed to regulate wind farm noise following consultation with the Victorian government.

“This case shows the importance of wind farms being proactive in dealing with noise complaints,” Dr Aberle said.

Source Link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-25/chill-winds-for-renewable-sector/100940308?utm_source=sfmc%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B&utm_medium=email%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B&utm_campaign=abc_rural_roundup_sfmc_20220401%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B&utm_term=%E2%80%8B&utm_id=1840227%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B&sfmc_id=236499429

Editor: This is great news for Australians who will soon be suffering alternative power blackouts and for industry which needs a reliable coal fired power source. And a bonus of exposing the carbon dixoide scam.

ALP and Greens will crucify stable Queensland power supplies with useless foreign-owned wind farms surviving only on government grants

from Senator Malcolm Roberts and Cairns News

When the wind doesn’t blow the power doesn’t flow

The relentless march toward the insane renewable targets around the country is blinding many of us to the full cost of unreliable (renewable) energy.

Increasingly we are being told how “cheap” renewable energy is becoming, how many jobs they will create and that renewables are environmentally friendly.

Mt Emerald Windfarm on the Atherton Tablelands came online in late 2018 but locals say much of the time the turbines are turned off.
Pic (Steven Nowakowski)

These are the consistent claims of Labor and Greens. The statements are wildly inaccurate, and they mislead the Australian public.

Take for example the proposed Chalumbin wind plant, 10km south of Ravenshoe in Far North Queensland. On completion this will be the largest wind plant in Australia boasting 94 wind turbines.

The original developer of the Chalumbin project, Epuron is a German group which in December sold its holding company to Korean entity Ark Energy.

Commenting on the transaction, Yun B. Choi, Chairman of Ark Energy and Vice Chairman of Korea Zinc said this friendly acquisition allows us to accelerate Korea Zinc Group’s energy transition and contributes to Ark Energy’s long-term ambition to develop a new green energy export corridor from Australia to South Korea.

Installation requires 31,500ha (77,805 acres) of virgin land of which 1,250ha will be cleared. Individual blades are the length of a football field and the turbine height is 160m and infrastructure includes 146km of roads up to 70m wide.

Close to the Koombooloomba and Tully Falls National Parks and the Tully Falls hydro power plant, this wind plant will have a huge negative impact on the local ecology, wildlife and farming.

On one hand the Greens want to demolish sustainable hardwood industries because of the impact on the environment, yet find it acceptable to demolish primary remnant vegetation for a wind plant.

The cost of producing unreliable (renewable) energies are never fully transparent. The inconvenient truth is that additional infrastructure costs, for example transmission lines, are left out of the full cost. The other major factor on which the Greens remain silent is the size of government subsidies.

Each of the 94 wind turbines in the Chalumbin wind plant receives a $500,000 / year subsidy; that is your taxpayer money used to produce this “cheap power”. And with a maximum of just 30 ongoing jobs, up to 10 that will be highly specialised, the prospect of significant local employment looks bleak, while higher electricity costs will kill agricultural and manufacturing jobs.

Another recently constructed wind farm covering 6000 acres adorns the Atherton Tablelands landscape at Walkamin just 50 klms north of Chalumbin. It came on line two years ago much to the objection of farmers and the general public.

Cairnsnews is reliably informed by contributors who travel past the 53 Mount Emerald monoliths on a daily basis that 80 per cent of the time these generators are turned off. Their blades are locked because the grid is over-supplied.

Yet under the terms of their contract to the Queensland Government, the owners, Ratch Australia get paid a guaranteed amount per kilowatt regardless if the turbines are turning or not.

RATCH-Australia is owned by the Singaporean-based RH International (Singapore) Corporation Pte Limited of which the Thailand-based Ratchaburi Electricity Generating Holding Public Company Limited is the ultimate parent.
Cairnsnews is unaware of any wind farms which are Australian owned.

https://mailchi.mp/0fedc99c7df7/cheap-renewables-a-lie?e=0f85f656c7

High power prices and renewable energy will finish off most industries

By Alan Moran, Saltbush Club and Cairnsnews,

Rio Tinto’s [Paywall] announced closure of its aluminium smelter in New Zealand due to uncompetitive power prices is a reminder of the vulnerability of Australia’s four remaining smelters, all of which face sharply higher prices courtesy of government energy policies. With energy costs comprising about a third of their total costs, smelters are industry’s bellwethers of future energy competitiveness and all four of Australia’s are on national suicide watch.

As a result of subsidies to wind and solar, these expensive and unreliable energy sources have caused high customer costs, both directly and indirectly, while also diverting the nation’s investment resources into avenues that actually damage the economy.

Amumina producer Rio Tinto Alcan has threatened to close its CQ Boyne Smelter over  extortionist power prices causing the loss of 3000 jobs. This would place Rio’s Weipa bauxite mine under a cloud.

The Queensland Labor Government”s suicidal rush to rely on 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030 will finish off any remaining industries that rely on base load power. Rio’s Tannum Sands aluminum smelter is struggling now with high power costs and has threatened to close down its Gladstone refinery and Boyne smelter if power charges don’t ease. This would result in the loss of more than 3000 jobs for its Gladstone  workforce.

Commonwealth and state subsidies for wind and solar energy are running at just under $7 billion a year. $4 billion of these are as a result of requirements imposed on consumers by the Commonwealth’s Renewable Energy Target, its similar provisions for roof-top installations and measures taken by state governments. Some $2 billion of assistance to renewables comes from direct subsidies.

The effect of these subsidies is compounded by their forcing out of production lower cost coal generators. As a result, prices are now double what they were three years ago, bringing the national damage to over $15 billion per year. The outcome is that from having the world’s lowest cost electricity we now suffer from being among the highest and our reliance on intermittent renewables has left supply increasingly precarious.

But it does not stop there. In order to accommodate the subsidised renewables, consumers are being required to spend vast sums to augment transmission links.

These expenditures are for two reasons. First, they are to allow the surplus from wind and solar during daytime peaks to be exported – a further subsidy to renewables. Secondly, they are to provide greater security for those regions, especially South Australia, which have become over-reliant on intermittent power, having jettisoned the in-state coal generators that provided stability and reliability. In addition, suffering from a disastrous Malcolm Turnbull thought bubble, we are in the process of converting the magnificent Snowy and Tasmanian hydro systems into quasi-batteries that will, at a cost of 30 per cent of their output, simply offset the inherent unreliability and intermittent nature of wind and solar. The Tasmanian link is likely to cost over $2 billion and Snowy2 will be far pricier than this.

At some future date we will ask how this was allowed to happen. How did we as a nation not only acquiesce in but actually finance the demise of our energy industry? Agenda 21 can provide the answers.

Obviously, the great sales pitch from the wind/solar subsidy seekers is part of the answer. That pitch promised low cost reliable electricity if only the government offered a few incentives as a bridge to this future. So also is the hysteria, on which the subsidy-seekers’ pitch partly rested, about global warming and the misinformation that this can be remedied by Australia abandoning the fossil fuels that still supply three quarters of our electricity.

But a great deal of the blame must be sheeted home to the bureaucracy, especially Treasury, formerly the gatekeeper to wasteful spending and the leader in combating other damaging proposals and policy stances. Forty years ago, under the legendary John Stone, the Commonwealth Treasury not only focused on paring back ministerial spending ambitions but was also the leader in reducing regulatory imposts – which were at that time mainly in the form of import tariffs.

Gradually Treasury has metamorphosed. Treasurers themselves, with the notable exception of Peter Costello, have been incapable of resisting the green interventionist advice that they have been offered.

Today the Treasury is headed by people who are wedded to accelerating an “inevitable” replacement of fossil fueled electricity generation to one dominated by wind, solar or some yet to be discovered alternative. Secretary Steven Kennedy was the author of the notorious 2008 Garnaut report with its panoply of taxes and new spending levers designed to transform the economy. The two senior Deputy Secretaries, Jenny Wilkinson and Meghan Quinn have also spent over a decade pressing for socialist carbon taxes and other interventions designed to push the economy in the directions they favour.

The coronavirus crisis offers an opportunity to turn back the tide before it engulfs the entire economy. Benefits include savings of over $2 billion in Commonwealth and state outlays presently wasted in direct support of renewables, a further $5 billion in regulatory forced transfers imposed on electricity customers and almost $10 billion in consequent increases in wholesale energy costs. In addition, there are the further outlays down the pike on new transmission lines and in converting the hydro schemes into renewable support facilities.

But the leading bureaucrats will not help in illuminating these opportunities and the Energy Minister is either incapable of persuading his colleagues to reverse course or he too is captive to the same environmentalist fervor.

The stupidity of green power

from Viv Forbes, Science Writer

“Daring to Doubt”
by Tony Abbott:
“Climate change is by no means the sole or even the most significant symptom of the changing interests and values of the West. Still, only societies with high levels of cultural amnesia could have made such a religion out of it. Beware the pronouncement, “the science is settled”. It’s the spirit of the Inquisition, the thought-police down the ages. Almost as bad is the claim that “99 per cent of scientists believe” as if scientific truth is determined by votes rather than facts.”
–Tony Abbott, 2017 Annual GWPF Lecture, London 9 October 2017
https://www.thegwpf.org/tony-abbott-daring-to-doubt

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/10/dangerous-abbott-unleashed-speaks-the-truth-critics-froth-and-flounder/

 “Escaping the Renewable Energy Trap”
by Alan Moran:
https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/09/escaping-the-renewable-energy-subsidy-trap/

 “The Paris Agreement”
by President Donald Trump
What he really said.

https://www.thegwpf.com/reminder-what-president-trump-really-said-about-the-paris-agreement/

Serious Defects in Australia’s Energy Policies

Donald Trump:

“… As President, I can put no other consideration before the wellbeing of American citizens.  The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers — who I love — and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production.

Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country.  This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune….”

A group of retired senior engineers challenge Australia’s bi-partisan energy foolishness. See:
https://carbon-sense.com/2017/10/13/open-letter-to-the-prime-minister-of-australia/

 

Shock Finding – Renewables are NOT Renewable

by Viv Forbes

There is an incessant chorus from the green gospellers glorifying “renewable” energy and warning disbelievers that continued use of carbon fuels will damn the world to eternal fires of global warming.

Their ire is focussed on carbon dioxide, one very minor but beneficial atmospheric gas which is accused of causing more of everything bad: pollution and extreme weather, droughts and floods, snowstorms and hurricanes, malaria and mosquitos, icebergs and glacier retreat, heat waves and blizzards, declining polar bears and multiplying cane toads.

We are told that using “renewable” energy will prevent all these disasters and produce cheap “clean” electricity. Four points are relevant:

First, carbon dioxide produced by burning coal, oil, gas, diesel, petrol or wood is not a pollutant in the atmosphere, not the key driver of global warming or climate change, but a boon to all plants (and thus all life). It is clean and green. There is thus no environmental or climate justification for punitive taxes on carbon dioxide, or for really silly stuff like emissions trading or carbon capture and burial.

Second, wind and solar power have a role in remote or mobile applications and in domestic hot water generation, but are an unreliable and high cost addition to grid power. Because of their intermittent and unpredictable supply characteristics, the large areas of land required to collect significant energy, and their need for back-up generators or huge batteries, they can seldom compete in a fair market with coal, gas, nuclear or hydro power. Nothing anyone can do will change these natural characteristics.

Third, those who wish to use “renewable” energy or to become independent of the grid are free to do so, and this should continue. But green energy should not be molly-coddled with subsidies from taxpayers or other users, nor protected by extra taxes on carbon energy, taxpayer loans, mandated market shares or propped up prices.

Finally, there is one killer point that has recently emerged.

Google has long supported green energy and had a dream to power all of their energy-hungry computers and air-conditioned data centres with “renewables”. It was revealed recently by their own technical advisers that this dream is a delusion. The fatal flaw discovered is that wind/solar energy may not reduce life-time emissions of carbon dioxide and is unlikely to ever be cheaper than coal. The data collected shows that renewables will barely generate sufficient energy over the life of the facilities to recover the energy used to manufacture, construct and maintain those facilities.

Most so called “renewable” energy relies on the sun, and is better referred to as “in-exhaustible”. But at any point on Earth, wind/solar is more accurately called “intermittent energy”. And to build plants to extract electricity from the sun using wind or solar collectors is a zero-sum game or worse – they may not produce enough energy to recoup the energy cost of
replacing those facilities.

Wind/solar energy thus fails its central justification – it is not renewable.

For those who would like to read more:

Google Green tried hard to make green energy work:
http://www.google.com/green/energy/

But Google Engineers now say renewable energy won’t work:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-google-engineers-say-renewable-energy-simply-wont-work/

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/11/22/Renewable-energy-so-useless-that-even-greenie-Google-gave-up-on-it

Troubles at world’s largest solar plant: production down, gas usage up:
http://breakingenergy.com/2014/10/29/at-ivanpah-solar-power-plant-energy-production-falling-well-short-of-expectations/

The Catch22 of Energy Storage:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-energy-storage/

 

%d bloggers like this: