Back from travels finally. So much to catch up on.
Last week, the world leading nation in solar panel manufacturing announced big cuts to subsidies in order to make their electricity cheaper. Can you believe? The cuts are big enough for The Motley Fool to headline this “Why the Lights Went Out on Solar Today”. (h.t GWPF)
Image by Snowacinesy
Put this in perspective — in late 2016, Scientific American declared that China Is Dominating the Solar Industry. Apparently, the Chinese forced the prices down, drove US leaders out of business, and the US could only hope to be second. Without a hint of impending doom, Scientific American went on to title one sub-part: AN INDUSTRY PROPELLED BY TAX CREDITS. The Chinese government picked a “winner”, grabbed the industry from all over the world, brought it to China, and ran with it. Now apparently rising electricity prices hurt too much. Who could have seen that coming?
“According to some veterans in the U.S. solar industry, China bought solar companies and invited others to move to China, where they found cheap, skilled labor. Instead of paying taxes, they received tax credits.”
Last week the Chinese government announced solar subsidy cuts:
[Capital Watch] Chinese regulators said Friday they were unexpectedly suspending construction of new solar panel farms and cut subsidies to the industry, sending solar energy companies’ stocks plummeting Monday.
Chinese solar stocks immediately fell:
Some media reports said this policy approach was the most austere in years, and that it indicated a more significant rollback of subsidies for industry players.
The stock price falls in a day were in the order of 13 to 31%.
Look at a few home truths from a communist giant
Using unheard of transparency in the world of renewables, a Chinese academic explains that the main reason to cut solar subsidies is to “make electricity cheaper“.
Lin Boqiang, director of the China Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University, said the policy will curb the fast growth of PV power bases, amid efforts by the central government to make electricity cheaper for consumers.
“This year’s government work report clearly stipulated that 2018 electricity prices will be lowered by 10 percent. But the PV subsidy comes from continuous hiking of electricity prices in the past, which was paid for by ordinary consumers,” Lin told the Global Times on Sunday,
He added that with the need to cut electricity prices, the PV subsidies must now be scaled back.
The academic also admitted that the PV subsidy is paid for by “ordinary consumers”. If only Australia could aspire to have academics so honest, open and free to speak?
Renewable subsidies were a massive $15.6 billion USD slap for Chinese electricity consumers:
Both moves are aimed at keeping in check the more than 100 billion yuan (US$15.6 billion) deficit in a state-run renewable energy fund, which is financed by a surcharge on power users’ bills.
All this and Chinese electricity consumers don’t even get meaningfully votes…
UPDATE: China is really jumping on the brakes:
h/t Pat in comments
6 Jun: Motley Fool: Travis Hoium: China Just Dealt a Massive Blow to the Solar Industry
No company will be spared from the reduction in China’s solar incentives. Out of 99 gigawatts (GW) of solar projects built in 2017, 53 GW were built in China. That bullish streak came to an end on Monday when China took steps to slow its solar industry. Feed-in tariffs that provide set prices for electric power sent to the grid will be cut and distributed generation (DG) projects will be capped until further notice. Early estimates are that solar installations will fall to around 35 GW in 2018, with a lot of that already installed. The impact of the policy changes will be widespread, and no company will be spared…
China’s National Development and Reform Commission said there would be no more planned ground-mounted solar projects in 2018 and subsidies for future ground-mounted projects would be forbidden…
Distributed solar farms were also capped at 10 GW for 2018, a level that may have already been exceeded…
Demand is going to fall and prices could go with it. Roth Capital estimates the solar market will be oversupplied by 34 GW of panels…
Even SunPower’s (NASDAQ:SPWR) premium-priced high-efficiency solar panels will have a little more competition as Chinese manufacturers look to dump solar panels on anyone who will buy them…
So if 50% of the worlds solar was being built in China and it has suddenly slammed on the brakes there will be a flood of cheap panels in the next few months but solar manufacturers will go broke as the industry adjusts, and then panel prices will recover in a smaller market.
“Using unheard of transparency, a Chinese academic explains that the main reason for cut solar subsidies is to “make electricity cheaper“.”
WOW now there’s a thought Josh.
360
Could be something coming from Trump’s approach to make trade with China Fair – rather than subsidised products being used to put US manufacturers out of business.
The USA’s trade tarrifs have begun by attacking the dumping of subsidised steel, aluminium etc and if, as I suspect, China knows that the global warming scam is nearing its end game then a response to try and mollify Trump might be PV manufacture.
The EU has squealed about the new duties on steel and aluminium as being ‘protectionist’ when it is itself about the most protectionist there is with very high tarrifs on most countries imports to the EU. The USA charges EU car manufacturers just 2.5% import duty, in return the EU charges 10% import duty on US vehicles and motorcycles. Some of the EU duties on African countries trying to build their economies are as high as 100%.
400
Communists learning about domestic markets, lets hope this great leap forward ends better than the last one.
120
So a Communist Dictatorship destroys its competitors businesses by discounting an exported product up to a point when it affects there own local business.
We fall for this game every time and we actually have politicians fully paid up by China to screw their own country. You can only admire the Chinese, we are stupid.
Meanwhile, they continue to get elected and promote China’s agenda.
China is NOT our enemy, they are our COMPETITOR. We should be concerned if something they want is NOT IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST. They do not mind if we tell them. If we do not they will think we are stupid.
70
Geoff, I wouldn’t even call China our competitor, at leasr in the field of economics policy. Our governments see China only as a partner in trade, trading raw materials for manufactured goods.
Our governments show no comprehension whatsoever of the concept of national security. They can’t see around the first corner, not even while looking backwards.
70
I just love an opportunity to point out that what Margaret Thatcher sad about socialism applies to socialism in all it’s forms, including government subsidies, “Sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.” And I would add that in this case, since even in China the government has no money of its own because it creates no wealth, the subsidies are paid out of the pockets of the Chinese citizen just like it’s done anywhere else.
The inevitable result is that the apple cart is overturned and those golden apples roll down the nearest drain, never to be seen again.
All Trump wants is for China to treat the U.S. the same way China wants the U.S. to treat China. It’s better known as the golden rule, “Treat others as you would have them treat you.” Chinese government distortion of markets and honest free trade has made solar panel manufacturing run suddenly into what Thatcher said would happen.
How utterly predictable and I might add, how utterly simple to understand if you know that money is not wealth.
00
Forgive the apple cart metaphor but it’s easy for anyone to understand that someone loses valuable things, i;e; wealth.
00
“All this and Chinese electricity consumers don’t even get meaningfully votes…”
Neither do we!
430
Yes we don’t give enough meaningful votes because not enough voters here bother to use their brains and exercise their democratic right to choose another party other than the two majors to send a loud and clear message we had enough of this renewables nonsense. The next federal election will be very revealing. Either Australians are still asleep and so continue to support by default the renewables policies set by the majors, or they make the right choice and vote ACP and ON above at least the Greens if not all the rest in sufficient numbers to cause at least one if not hopefully both houses of parliament to be in a hung state. There is simply no other peaceful way to effect the change in direction in this country, which by the way has changed in at least the US thanks to Trump. Are we to remain alone on all this and go backwards while the rest of the world moved forward with coal and nuclear? It’s up to the Australian voters now.
361
Peter, I like what you are saying but voters have been scammed in so many ways and don’t understand the truth.
Every time I put my car radio to their ABC there’s a shower of pro renewables propaganda the is not conradicted.
Ordinary voters may be stupid in your eyes but the greater evil out there is in the deliberate falsification of pertinent information by those profiting from the cagw scam.
Surely the government has a responsibility to act on behalf of the population when deliberate misleading information is fed to the media for the sole purpose of profiteering.
People expect governments to act in their interests to punish wrongdoers but this isn’t happening.
We need a Royal commission to expose and punish profiteers.
KK
221
I understand but ignorance is no excuse. For the first time in history we now have a means to obtain vast amounts of freely available information very easily and very quickly. So if people are not prepared to question what they hear and see on the MSM then they only have themselves to blame for not checking out the facts. Why does China block so much internet content for their people? Because they don’t want the people to have ready access to information that would upset their rule. If people expect governments to act in their interests then they are fools. There’s also another problem. Even if all the people did bother to research the facts, many would still refuse to accept it due to their bias. Do you really think that people like the Greens would change their mind if it was explained to them with concrete evidence that runaway man-made global warming is a myth? My guess is very few if any would. Some would refuse to change their minds about renewables even if they believed it was a myth. Why? Because they want control, power and/or money. For whatever other reason the rest have already made up their minds and nothing will change their views – not even if they were presented iron clad proof they are wrong. A good example of such stubbornness is the fact there are people who actually believe the earth is flat despite all the evidence presented to them against it. Same thing about those who believe we never went to the moon. I could go on and on with many other examples. The bottom line is in a democracy such as ours people are responsible for the type of government we end up having so the buck stops with the voters. There are many reasons why people vote the way they do but unfortunate one reason that’s not often used is reason itself.
There will come a time when the pain becomes unbearable and the people will try to react accordingly, either peacefully or with violence. We are not there yet. Such a reaction will either succeed or fail depending on how much the government of the day has control over the people. Also the stronger the control the more likely the reaction will be violent if things become too harsh. But for now things are still too comfortable for most people in Australia so they don’t really care so much about politics. Most people’s attitude is still very much “no worries, mate, she’ll be right and besides I’m busy watching my favourite show on TV so stop boring me with politics”. Appeasement and social engineering are powerful tools that are used well by the left. It gives most people a false sense of comfort, at least until things go pear shaped.
210
Oddly enough, I suspect quite a few people might consider you to be the one not using reason all that well. You are often pushing Bernardi’s ACP as the answer. Reason says that, at least in the short term, it is no more than a protest party; it could well be that Bernardi started it simply because he saw his own prospects weren’t great in the Liberals. This was his way to make a splash.
But let’s imagine that nearly all the Liberals and Nationals decide to jump across to the ACP. Great, Bernardi has government. Let’s further suspend disbelief for a moment and have all his new members keep him on as Prime Minister. Would we be all that much better off? I think not. He was selected by the same political process that gave us the likes of Pyne and Bishop. Parties select for people who want power.
So people like me, who want less government interference in our freedoms, will never be offered a party affiliated candidate who represents us. Once the party has power, it will wield it.
That is the reasoning that has me usually voting informally — though I admit I did vote for Keneally in the Bennelong by election in the (unfortunately thwarted) hope that it might spill Shorten into power. A year and a half of Shorten government seemed preferable to the full three years we are headed for.
Unlike you, though, I can see other lines of reasoning leading to voting for particular parties. I accept that you have reasoned your way to being a loyal ACP advocate, and I’m quite willing to believe that many others have reasoned their way to being loyal to Labor, Liberals, Nationals, even the Greens. Have you any evidence for your statement quoted above?
51
I actually agree with you on most points but the main point you got completely wrong is your belief that I am pushing the ACP as the answer or solution. He is not the answer, and certainly not the right solution for certain other issues. All I am saying is we are to continue voting for majority governments, be they LNP or ALP then nothing will change the course and direction we are heading. The US has changed direction thanks to Trump, Russia changed direction some time ago thanks to Putin. Neither leader I would consider as perfect or even closely being ideal but they are certainly far better than the alternatives, which in the case of the US was a perverted form of left wing socialism and for Russia was Soviet/Stalin style socialism. Unfortunately for us here in Australia there is no similar path to break the nexus of leftist environmentalism being perpetrated by the likes of Turnbull and Shorten. The next best thing we can do is give enough support to parties like the ACP and ON who can then try and break that nexus. Neither party is ideal but we have to do something. Of course there is the possibility that a leadership challenge will develop in one of the two major parties and the new leader changes direction and does a 180 on the renewables versus coal issue. Some here believe that is going to happen, at least with the LNP. It would be nicer if that did happen but to be realistic I don’t see much evidence of that, not yet anyway. We can still hope though.
60
Why would you waste your time voting informally?
Nothing is achieved by doing this.
All you are doing is wasting your own petrol and time.
30
I can understand the reasoning of those who vote informally because I was one of them for a short period. At the time I took the view I can’t change things for the better so there is no point doing anything about it. I soon realised the problem with such reasoning. If enough did vote against the two major parties then change would be possible. So by not voting properly one is taking the cowards way out and running away from the situation. Sure if enough still won’t vote differently then we will still have a majority rule by one of the two major parties. That just proves that there were either too many cowards who didn’t elect to exercise their democratic right to vote accordingly, or there were too many placing their faith and trust in one of the two major parties and expecting either the same result or a different one, which in either case means the voter is a dill or a very extreme form of imagination like Spongebob.
11
@wal1957, voting is compulsory here, so the petrol and time aren’t optional.
As PeterS says, there are various rationales for voting informally. For my part, I view the “two” political wings as more or less metaphors for evolution — mutation tends to come from the “progressives”, and selection from the “conservatives” knocking the dafter ideas on the head (we wish!). Not to say innovations never go the other way — I’m using a broad brush here. I thought John Howard was giving a pretty similar view when he opined that the Australian electorate tends to “get it right”. In the spirit of that thought, why would you vote formally and possibly mess it up?
As I said though, I have recently been voting formally, against the Liberals, because we now find all the major parties want to drive mutation and nobody is trying to knock stupid ideas on the head; I’d prefer the “right” to return to their proper role.
Someone voting informally isn’t necessarily apathetic. I remember seeing an interview with BA Santamaria not long before his death where he said he had been voting informally for a long time (since the mid-’70s IIRC), yet few people were more politically engaged.
Here’s a fun thought that occurred to me some years back. Let’s say I started, along the lines of PH’s One Nation, RS’s “Informal Party” with a party constitution that meant representatives never voted in parliament, donated whatever stipend they got to (say) the Garvan Institute, etc. Basically such a party would give a formal slot for people to vote for less government. I can well imagine, were I to try such a thing, I would be an even deeper object of loathing than PH herself. This is an area where nearly all politicians (and many in the electorate) are conservative.
21
I walk to the polling station
24
Would you walk 500 Miles?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otXGqU4LBEI&list=RDotXGqU4LBEI&start_radio=1#t=67
20
The simple answer would be to have as the last item on the ballot paper ‘Non of the Above’.
That would set the cat among the pigeons and might provide the answer needed.
51
Ivan
The US does have the “write in” provision
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write-in_candidate
00
The people will only wake up when electricity outages become regular. I do not know how violent their reaction will be but I would not want to be a politician of one of the major parties or one of the elite controllers.
110
As RE increases its percentage share of the grid, the other hidden costs of using RE will become more problematic. It’s not just so called “ancillory services” (a term that didnt exist before RE) of frequency and voltage control which are now being tackled by auctioning off these newly made up “services” in order to sure up the grid. (Obviously at a cost, including increased oversight and management which adds to complexity and decreases reliability, these things were intrinsic in the grid at low RE penetration.)
Ugly design flaws that will crop up with further increased RE include “fault current discrimination” and issues with “ground currents”. Fault currents are important because they are used to determine how the grid protects itself from faults; how it shuts down and restarts after disruptions from accidents, overload or lightening etc.
Ground currents are involved in all of these as “earth return” to the generator and requires meticulous attention if stray currents are to be kept in control. As RE tends to be “distributed supply”, monitoring and control of currents will become more complex (and by implication more expensive and less reliable as there are more opportunities for unforseen failures in design.)
As an example of what i mean; domestic solar is a problem because the sun delivers energy that fluctuates wildly by the minute on partly cloudy days. To over come this expensive batteries are suggested. That helps to buffer supply but does nothing to address the impedence matching of the grid to the generators and consumers (power factor correction as supply routes vary). With many suppliers feeding the grid (and leaving it at will), energy is flowing in many varied routes and protecting the grid from failure becomes more complex especially as it is compounded by more ground current issues than ever before. More unforseen faults will arise and reliabilty will decrease. Fixes are technically possible but as layer on layer of expensive fixes accrue you end up with a basket case of junk.
I think China and Germany are realizing this whilst we are caught up in some kind of euphoria as we turn our back on something that worked very well in comparison. Eventually the penny will drop; the sooner, the less money and heartache wasted.
160
It occurs to me that increased ground currents could lead to unsafe conditions due to earth leads in spots floating above earth potential.
If so, we could see deaths.
30
The only possible utility that I can see in the ACP is the possibility that they might hold the balance of power in the senate, and might direct a few preferennces. They are too long a shot to take.
I see something more immediate. Barnaby Joyce has been surely the strongest voice in the parliament against the AGW scam. He has taken leave. Immediately he went on leave, the government started spruicking the AGW scam, which action was blogged here (carbon tax.on new cars).
I see this as Malcom Turnbull throwing down the gauntlet, planning to settle the issue of any challenge to his leadership before Barnaby Joyce comes back from leave. BJ pasted him in the TV interview, so the issue won’t go away without a settlement.
The next ten days could be very interesting.
30
I hope so.
10
Ted, you’re not trying to make me give a shish about ineffectual political bun-fights? Those guys presided over the mess—they will not be fixing it any time soon.
Frankly the shine is all gone from Barney’s halo, he only has himself to blame for that. Chairman Mal only took a gratuitous golden opportunity to kick his teeth in while he was down, after Barnstormer had already blown his own foot off. lol
So much for, “getting the band back together”, Barney was too busy shaggin his roady.
50
Consumers are the ultimate voters.
What they choose to buy or not buy dictates the use of resources beyond anybody’s predictive powers.
Which is how it should be.
The alternative is an downward economic spiral by state bureaucrat.
And your fraction of a millionth of a say in who your principal parasite is every few years makes for a bleak comparison.
120
True, but here we are dealing with an essential service.
Our President may tell us that we can shop amongst the electricity providers for a good deal but they ALL have high prices, so that’s a joke.
He knows that, of course, but he likes watching the worms squirm.
Then we have the alternative, Shorton Integrity as well.
It’s a bit like our choice of power providers, a non event.
KK
111
Like our choice of nbn providers. One, you don’t have a choice, and it’s a hopeless service.
90
I’m sure that my nbn is the same speed as the cheaper ADSL original.
It just costs more.
60
Mine is excellent.Rolled out many years ago and getting 80-120m/bytes persec . NBN slung the cable alongside the power lines,then straight to the house.Beaut! THe only bit of work this country has put out in my 63 years that has left me proud and satisfied. Maybe we’re not a third world mob after all.
10
My sister in shepparton has given her NBN a rating of 1/10….. must try harder…
Thier nbn drops out regularly, and my mother who has a medical alert emergency dialler now has no real assuramce of a reluable phone service.
Think about it this way – you have a govt mandated bit of comms gear in every house.
All the NBN has done us made it easier for the govt to crawl up your rear end, and allows the spooks a better platform.
Looking at it from a high level, if you wanted to surveil a populations every communication, this is exactly what youd do. Typical australuans are too ignorant to see it of course…..
40
glen,
I think you mean ‘bits’ not ‘bytes’.
i.e 80-120 mbits/sec
There’s a big difference: 1 byte = 8 bits
00
Well you do have choice, unless your point is they are all to costly
You dont have a choice of NBNs but then you dont have a choice of electricity poles and wires companies either
People like to bag the NBN. Our experience has been positive not sure if we are just lucky or part of a silent majority.
01
It’s less good here Yarpos and I don’t think we are very far from you. It’s maybe marginally better than what we had before some of the time and sometimes just as poor as previously.
11
I’m fortunate. I have been on cable for nearly 15 years! Just recently had confirmation that we don’t need to switch to the NBN, and can stay on our HFC cable! Good news for me! I have seen speeds North of 200 Mb/sec! Upload is pretty consistent at 40- 50 Mb/Sec. Just checked my connection (4pm) and getting 212 Mb/s!
10
I wonder how the headlines will be worded in SMH and ABC? Blank verse perhaps??
Cheers,
Dave B
120
Ingsoc Newspeak.
50
Very blank.
White supremacy will rule there
40
Wow $US16.5Bn in ‘subsidies’ (Ripoffs)
Tiny Australia pays over $6Bn for nothing. Unlike China, half the cash leaves the country for ever. This is with 1/60th of the population of a country with 60% of the GDP of North America.
If the prize for self flagellating ripoffs was given, Australia would win easily. The Green’s PM Malcolm Turnbull, champion of the Paris Accord and enemy of Donald Trump could accept this prize, the IgNoble, on behalf of all the wilfully blind politicians who refuse to accept that we are paying the world’s highest electricity prices because of them.
His so called Liberal government has been punishing Australia and Australians for nearly 20 years to support his Green fantasy of evil CO2. There is no science involved and Turnbull is fully supported by his ABC, his CSIRO and his universities, where sane conservatives are not welcome and anyone who speaks out is immediately fired.
Can we please have our real PM back?
441
It’s a sad day when a one party communist country is more open about punitive government policy than a Liberal democracy. We have had two years of conservative government in the last ten.
412
No we can’t have our real conservative PM back since the people don’t want him back, unfortunately. It appears we will have many more years to come of a socialist party regardless of which major party wins. I think Australians are drugged on socialism and can’t use their brains to think properly any more. That’s OK – a crash and burn scenario will cure them of that.
190
‘Australians are drugged on socialism …’
Socialism with Australian characteristics.
70
Yes we have over a long time have developed a unique form of socialism now mixed in with left wing environmentalism to make it worse. Howard’s era was an anomaly, albeit a beneficial one.
50
Our democracy has a centre right and centre left, and an outsider might have trouble seeing the difference.
Putting that aside its worthwhile looking at the economics, like most liberal democracies Australia has a mixed economy and it would be interesting to do a comparison with China.
My guesstimate is that Beijing has encouraged free enterprise over state run organisations, so their economy probably has the same mix as ours.
11
We have a single part, just bits of it have different wrappers to make sure the illusion of demicracy is maintained.
Proof – no mattet who you “elect”, we get the same nation- killing agenda.
QED.
31
The MSM and the left certainly don’t want him back but why do you think the people don’t want him back? He convincingly won the last election when he was leader.
70
Going into the next election the punters have Malcolm Turnbull at the helm, with Tony Abbott 10/1 trailing Bishop 7/1.
This could change quickly if the ginger group went on the attack before Xmas, otherwise the Bill and Penny show will rule the roost after the next election.
11
I’m not sure of the exact reason(s) but the polls certainly show he is not popular. One possible reason is Australians are typically not conservative of late. One problem with that is how come Howard was in power for so long? Perhaps the nation suffered a temporary lapse, or people realised the alternative was really worse. Then again why did Rudd win so easily given to me at least he was an obvious fake artist? It’s a complicated topic and I’m not so sure what the real reason are for Abbott being so unpopular. Actually I didn’t like him for his original participation in helping to get Pauline Hanson behind bars. He has changed his mind on that and I believe she has forgiven him. I would vote for the LNP if he returned as the leader provided he adopted most if not all of the energy policies of the ACP.
30
How accurate really are the majority of polls? Who takes them, targetting which people; how are the questions framed? How many Sir Humphrey Appleby-types are involved?
11
The polls are not accurate for multiple reasons. However, one thing is for sure. If Abbott was really popular the polls and the betting agencies would at least be indicating some strength in his support. At the moment it’s woeful. Having said that the only poll that really counts of course is the election. This is one reason why we should be like the US where it is impossible to replace a leader part way through a term just because the majority of party members decide the polls are not favourable. If they want it that way we should have an election every year to make it fair. Otherwise, let the term run out.
00
Well,we got Barnaby – who has fallen over a cliff. His support has almost vanished in New England-which is remarkable given the personal support he got over the citizenship issue.John Anderson has huge support across Northern NSW and ticks alot of boxes.Quite a cerebral chap is John and I hope he considers further;at 62 he is still quite young.AS well he is suspicious, if not hostile to the issues that the political Left favour-and that includes AGW.
20
John Anderson is not a member of the Denialati, but I thank him for the raw data.
‘The property has been in his family for “well over 100 years” and farm records show there were droughts of equal severity between 1902 and 1904 and again in 1940. Mr Anderson said the current situation was so bad he had just re-energised a well which “we haven’t used since 1940”.
“But it was there in 1940. And it’s being used for the first time in nearly 70 years. I’m not a climate change denier but I would be very wary about using this as a political device,” he told The Australian Financial Review.
20
….. ‘not so sure what the real reason are for Abbott being so unpopular.’
His swimming attire became a joke and when the Queen asked him to knight her husband he was roundly abused by the MSM. Its looks like character assassination of Abbott, but the media did the same to Julia.
Tony Abbott has become reinvigorated, a more astute individual on a quest to regain his status and lead us out of this political wilderness.
He needs to start campaigning now.
60
Granted Abbott has improved with age but he’s still hasn’t got the political killer instinct. Compared to the big boys he’s a real softy. To succeed in politics heads need to be kicked at times with style. Trump for example is a master at that.
11
Trump is a heavyweight and Abbott a light weight, different political culture, but Tony has history and is ready for a fight.
He was a good boxer in his day and I expect he’ll make a comeback before Xmas, otherwise his career is finished, because a Coalition loss at the next election would see others jockey for the leadership. Not sure that he wants the job of Opposition leader anyway.
10
I hope Abbott is ready but it’s mostly wishful thinking.
20
Maybe, Tony is already planning what he will do when he becomes PM again.
“Let’s try to do some things that we can and must,” he said. “We could take the pressure off the cost of living by doing something about power prices … the next thing we could do is slow down the rate of immigration, because while we’ve got stagnant wages and soaring house prices and short of infrastructure, why are we adding 250,000 people to our population? It’s just mad.
“Unfortunately if you touch on these things you are a climate change denier, and you are anti-immigrant. It is a suffocating political correctness that has descended over so much of our common sense.”
41
“No we can’t have our real conservative PM back since the people don’t want him back, … ”
—
Eating a raw onion on live TV like it was an apple didn’t help. But giving aust-day gongs to pommy royals? … that’s back-bench time for your sins.
10
Even with his gaffs, Tony is still our best chance.
00
Do you need a loan?
Almost interest free!! Go on…it’s easy!! Or we can just lend the money directly to your gov so you can enjoy subsidies…
Grand sale!, grand sale!….If its solar panels/renewables you want to buy, cheap loans are not far awhyyy (away)…
40
“Wow $US16.5Bn in ‘subsidies’ (Ripoffs)”
Strewth!! $US16.5Bn in ‘subsidies’ (Loans)
40
Here’s the thing. China expects to make stuff, we expect to consume stuff.
For Josh Frydenberg as he embarked on life a “product” was a different-coloured bank book with a slightly different way of handling interest and withdrawals. Because your old bank book was a bit dog-eared and the new book of a different colour offered a different way of calculating interest (provided you did this-‘n-that with your deposits and withdrawals) you often opted for the new-coloured book. Sorry, I meant “product”.
A couple of years on you noticed that your money wasn’t really doing much and you noticed a deep-and-mystical ad on TV announcing a radical, exciting and challenging new “product” where you got a bank book that was not only a different colour but a slightly different shape. Provided, of course, you did this-‘n-that with your deposits and withdrawals…
See the problem? What most people call next-to-nothing Josh and his ilk don’t just call a service. They call it a “product”. And now that the frogs are properly boiled after several decades of conditioning, “unpacking” is something you do with an idea, and “processing” is what you do with an emotion. (Ref Macquarie Newspeak-English Dictionary…or watch ABC.)
For the Chinese, “product” is something solid which you “process”. You then sell it to the Skippies who only have to “unpack” it.
130
Is it a product being processed or us?
60
Interesting question. After I’ve unpacked that I’ll process it. Right now I’m processing certain negative emotions connected to past experiences with cane toads.
80
The really big money is in the debt.
Not in what is produced.
60
Maybe an economist here can calculate how much the a subsidy costs after the interest is calculated/”unpacked”.
30
Fractional Reserve Banking means 90-95% of money IS debt.
& now they want to take our cash away! [ & nobody will have any financial sovereignty ]
40
interesting
the Chinese usually move very slowly, carefully and with much aforethought, right? I’d say, hope and pray that that’s all she wrote on solar…..
50
Hi Antoine
It will take years to play out. The first sign in Australia that this has been noticed will be a spate of articles in The Conversation, SMH, The Age, the ABC and the Guardian pointing out that solar panel prices are continuing to fall, making it the cheapest form of power so we must invest more to get cheaper electricity.
40
BTW what is the capacity factor of pumped hydro in Tassie? Minister Frydenberg claiming 4800MW in new deal.
30
The same old slogans;
cheap (well we found out what that means)
Real soon!. (probably of benefit to your grandchildren)
Will power X** households (providing they don’t use much, nor at times of peak demand).
** Suitable number in tens or hundreds of thousands.
80
The big question here as I see it is, ” What will this mean for us in terms of power prices and solar arrays costs Australia?”
50
Well, the solar panels will be more expensive to buy, and those costs will be passed on to the consumers.
If you want electricity, you’ll pay more. The End!
50
With dying market for solar panels in China they will likely flood the supply in the rest of the world. That should mean panel prices fall at least until there is a shakeout in the solar panel manufacturing firms.
It should mean lower cost of rooftop solar in Australia.
It is unrelated to electricity price in Australia. The cost of electricity will continue to trend upwards to the point where low intensity consumers leave the grid. That situation is already occurring in South Australia.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/i-m-truly-concerned-aemo-chief-warns-on-rooftop-solar-20180424-p4zbg0.html
30
How many ‘green’ jobs went with this downturn in the renewables industry. My heart goes out to all those that will lose jobs as a result of this, but it was something entirely predictable.
So much for the self sustaining green renewables industry that was going to take over our economy.
100
I don’t feel sorry for any of the rent seekers.
These people hopped onto the “bandwagon” in the hope of making easy money (which some of them have – I’m sure).
Had they done their homework they could have easily discovered that it was a giant Ponzi scheme from very simple research for themselves on the web.
These schemes ALWAYS end up hurting some people – just like pyramid selling – c’est la vie!!
Take your medicine people – don’t come crying to me.
Chgeers,
10
The flow on effect could be interesting.
50
.
Germany also is cutting back on its subsidies to the renewable energy scammers.
The subsidies run out in 2020 for a couple of thousand early wind turbine installations built around 2000 to take full advantage of the renewable energy scam[ out of a now 28000 on shore German turbines ]
It seems they wont be replaced as to do so is no longer economic, and / or they cannot access any subsidies anymore,. New installations can’t be done with the new larger turbines on the smaller foundations of the early turbines and then the real elephant in the room that is now starting to make up a lot ofthe fast increasing public opposition, the “nimby factor’ re wind turbines is beginning to have a large political effect on the german renewable energy industry.
Germany of course is closing down its 4 [ ? ] nuclear reactorsds by eaerly 2019 which will exacerbate the increasing instability in germany’s grid systems.
The UK government on the other hand has made the decision to subsidise the Japanese outfit, Hitachi to the tune of 15 billion pounds to build another nuclear power generator even though the French / Chinese reactor is way behind schedule and will cost the Brits quite a few billion pounds over the original quote .
The driver behnd this decision is the fact that one of the last british gas cooled reactors which use carbon blocks as moderators has been found to have serious problems with cracking in the carbon nuclear reactions moderating blocks.
[ Thats the real “carbon”, not the psuedo “carbon” aka CO2 that the over educated but basically ignorant elites and climate change activists in their hubris so personified by the inner city smashed avacado latte sipping elitist set and the academic ivory towered, ABC backed ignorance, keep on keeping on about ]
And just for further a further example [ below ] of the stupidity of thinking that wind and solar will supply anything more than a few percent of any nation’s power requirements but will cause endless instability and price increases then the British have yet another prime reason to forget wind [ and solar ] if their politicians had slightly more sense and a modicum of intelligence greater than does our depressing political mob when it comes to reliable and cheap energy for the public and for industry and commerce..
——————
Via the GWPF
70
I once had an engineering instructor who claimed (and demonstrated)that all of the basic structural principles could be demonstrated wiht a yardstick and managed with simple algebra, and every design, no matter how sophisticated, should b reviewed against principles at this level of simplicity.
Economics, at its intersection with politics, is similar. A market transaction occurs when a willing buyer and a willing seller agree on price. In this case. the ‘yardstick’ is the word willing. If one or both parties is compelled to make the transaction, there is a distortion in market value to advantage one party and disadvantage the other.
In the long run, the market usually asserts itself. ]
There are two major area of distortion China has imposed on the west. Subsidy, which holds down and displaces cost in order to gain market share, and theft of intellectual property, which reduces research investment and shortens time to market.
That they can voluntarily slow these subsidies (yet continue to dominate the market) is likely a counted a victory for the Chinese even as we rejoice that solar is seeking it’s own level in the larger market. Assuming that there remains a reasonable size market for solar in fair competition with other energy production, and the Chinese now dominate this market and can find a way to produce profitably at the new lower prices, they win this round…..a rare win for government compulsion in an economic sphere.
As other governments also discover the black hole that is energy subsidies, and have to divert their subsidies to the more mundane activities of potholes and pensions, solar will find it’s proper place in the smorgasboard of energy options. I expect it is a small but significant one.
“Anti” solar folks tend, I think to be more reasonable than the pro solar zealots.
Solar supplements for power plants with air conditioning peak loads….check. When the sun is hottest they produce. At least worth running the numbers on.
Solar/battery combinations for millions of little DC applications, check.
Solar or space, check.
There was a real market before subsidies for dispatch power applications, & it will likely grow and evolve after.
But while this result make make us happy that “renewable” zealots are learning a lesson, there rest of may want to look at what other markets the Chinese are attempting to control, how successful they are, and what the consequences of their form of imperialism (for that is truly what it is) bode for us.
Some argue that if the Chinese control mines and manufacturing overseas, it’s OK, for in a crisis control could be treturned to the host country. Really? At what cost?
History suggests that being a colony is a mixed blessing, and regaining freedom expensive. I don’t think I want to celebrate this result too much.
70
Jo stated:
You are giving undue credit to Australian academics here. I have not seen anything written by them that demonstrates they have a worthwhile understanding of the cost of intermittency in the power system.
If anyone has seen anything from an Australian academic that casts doubt on the virtues of ambient energy sources please educate me.
170
They are not tenured to think Will.Faith in their misplaced idealism is the go.Just the other day I tried to convince a retired academic that Nitrogen was not a greenhouse gas. I urged him to follow this up in order to save him in future.
40
Rick.Sorry.
10
OT —
Some of us remember D-day on this date.
My grandfather and his brother landed on D+1, and were both fortunate to survive and prosper.
We tend not to think of Australians participating, but, per capita, they were well represented.
We tend not to remember that, as fearful as we were of a west coast invasion after Pearl, the Aussies spent the
entire war of the Pacific on the front lines and in peril.
We were allies then. I think, as peoples, we still are. Around a kitchen table, your average Australian and American would likely
agree on the importance of freedom & free choice to the human spirit.
STarnge, isn’t it, that people are often som much better than their governments?
130
Agree Richard, however, by that stage of the war (in Europe) there were very few if any Aussie land forces in the D-Day landings. They’d all been pulled back to the Pacific, to fight the Japs, mostly because our prior great ally, the British Empire, didn’t have either the strategic priority, nor the excess military means, to also fight the Japs. But Churchill did want to leave Australia virtually undefended, and try to take it back later, after Hitler was done. Thus we finally said, GET STUFFED to Churchill and bought our army back to Australia. It was that particular event which made us realise that we need our real Allies in the Indo-Pacific, not in the Atlantic. The Jap’s thrust into the Solomons and NE Coral Sea Islands was their attempt to try and cutoff Australia from the USA. Hence Canberra’s enhanced reactivity to China, of late, as they appear to have something similar in mind in that area, for similar reasons. If China wanted trouble, then trying to cut-off Australia from the US, via the Eastern Coral Sea would would be seen as an attack on both countries (and several others as well).
We only know each other so well now because since back then we did our respective Govt’s bidding on the Strategic level. But yes, we see eye to eye easily on most things at the personal level too.
And now we come full circle somewhat, as the post-brexit UK establishment is again busy trying to become relevant to Australians once more. Well, we equally eye to eye with them, personally, too, just not with their influence-hungry royals and over-reaching political establishment.
Like you guys, we need to formalise full Independence from the Windsors–real soon.
20
[…] that solar stocks in China have fallen in the wake of reduced subsidies. The idea is to have cheaper power. Why didn’t we think of that? Share this:TwitterFacebookGoogleRedditLinkedIn This entry was […]
30
6 Jun: CarbonPulse: Chinese solar investors rue subsidy cuts, ask govt for grace period
A group of 11 major Chinese solar power investors on Wednesday said a recent cut in feed-in tariffs has created major problems, urging the government to instead introduce a market-based mechanism to help the industry become self-sufficient within 3-5 years.
4 Jun: Motley Fool: China is Using This, Not Renewable Energy, to Replace Coal
The country grew year-over-year imports of this crucial energy source 58% in the first four months of 2018. It’s a huge opportunity for investors.
by Maxx Chatsko
For instance, China isn’t using renewable energy to immediately replace coal-fired power plants, which supplied 72% of the country’s electricity in 2015 — more than double the share of coal in the electric grids of the United States.
That’s because renewable energy is one of the least efficient ways to go about replacing coal consumption in a short period of time. Instead, China is hurriedly building natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG) import infrastructure to replace coal in the near-term. In fact, the country is single-handedly shifting global markets, having imported 58% more LNG in the first four months of 2018 than in the year-ago period, with American supply playing a central role…
China can’t use renewable energy to replace coal overnight, because wind and solar power are much less efficient. For instance, Chinese coal-fired power plants boasted capacity factors (the rate at which a generation asset produces at its installed capacity) of 48% in 2017. That’s very low, hinting at a glut of coal capacity, but it’s significantly better than the country’s renewables. In 2017 Chinese wind and solar had capacity factors of just 21.3% and 10.7%, respectively.
What that means is simple: Replacing the electricity generation provided by 1 gigawatt of coal in China would require the installation of 2.3 GW of wind or 4.5 GW of solar. Natural gas, on the other hand, is on par with coal when it comes to capacity factor, making it a more efficient use of capital for time-constrained direct replacement of coal-fired power in the grid and industrial base…
•Growth has come quickly. In 2010 China imported 10 million metric tons (mtpa) of LNG. That grew to 20 mtpa in 2015, and just shy of 40 mtpa last year. In the first four months of 2018 imports hit 15.75 million metric tons.
•Growth will continue. The country has 17 LNG import terminals, boasting a combined capacity of 7.4 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d), which is expected to grow to 11.2 Bcf/d by 2021 according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
•We ain’t seen nothing yet. By 2035 the nation is expected to import a staggering 200 mtpa. Last year the entire global LNG trade amounted to 294 mtpa.
It couldn’t come at a better time for American natural gas producers, which are increasingly relying on exports to shuttle away excess supply…READ ON
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/06/04/china-is-using-this-not-renewable-energy-to-replac.aspx
70
update from Travis Hoium at Motley Fool:
6 Jun: Motley Fool: Travis Hoium: China Just Dealt a Massive Blow to the Solar Industry
No company will be spared from the reduction in China’s solar incentives.
Out of 99 gigawatts (GW) of solar projects built in 2017, 53 GW were built in China.
That bullish streak came to an end on Monday when China took steps to slow its solar industry. Feed-in tariffs that provide set prices for electric power sent to the grid will be cut and distributed generation (DG) projects will be capped until further notice. Early estimates are that solar installations will fall to around 35 GW in 2018, with a lot of that already installed. The impact of the policy changes will be widespread, and no company will be spared…
China’s National Development and Reform Commission said there would be no more planned ground-mounted solar projects in 2018 and subsidies for future ground-mounted projects would be forbidden…
Distributed solar farms were also capped at 10 GW for 2018, a level that may have already been exceeded…
Demand is going to fall and prices could go with it. Roth Capital estimates the solar market will be oversupplied by 34 GW of panels…
Even SunPower’s (NASDAQ:SPWR) premium-priced high-efficiency solar panels will have a little more competition as Chinese manufacturers look to dump solar panels on anyone who will buy them…
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/06/06/china-just-dealt-massive-blow-to-solar-industry.aspx
60
Thanks PAt. Added an update to the post.
So if 50% of the worlds solar was being built in China and it has suddenly slammed on the brakes there will be a flood of cheap panels in the next few months but solar manufacturers will go broke as the industry adjusts, and then panel prices will recover in a smaller market.
81
coal is king, even with plenty of spin from Carbon Brief:
5 Jun: CarbonBrief: Mapped: The world’s coal power plants
by Simon Evans & Rosamund Pearce
Since 2000, the world has doubled its coal-fired power capacity to 2,000 gigawatts (GW) after explosive growth in China and India. Another 200GW is being built and 450GW is planned…
The way coal’s next chapter unfolds is key to tackling climate change. All unabated coal must close within a few decades if warming is to be limited to less than 2C above pre-industrial temperatures, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA)…
Using data from CoalSwarm’s Global Coal Plant Tracker, it features around 10,000 retired, operating and planned coal units, totalling nearly 3,000 gigawatts (GW) across 95 countries…
The promise of cheap electricity to fuel economic growth is driving this expansion. Coal generates 40-41% of the world’s electricity, its highest share in decades. And there are now 77 countries using coal power, up from 65 in 2000. Another 13 plan to join the club…
Since 2000, the most dramatic changes have taken place in China, as the slider below shows. Its coal fleet grew five-fold between 2000 and 2017 to reach 935GW, nearly half the global total…
The second-largest increase in capacity since 2000 has been in India, where the coal fleet has more than tripled to 215GW…
Campaigners see a fast-developing Asia as the key risk for coal expansion…
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants
80
Hello Everybody,
I have found the concept of The Iron Triangle (described below) very useful for understanding the parlous state that the West’s energy policy has been manoeuvred into over the last few decades.
The Iron Triangle is, in political science circles, a well-known phenomenon shown in diagram form in [Ref. 20] and is described in written form in [Ref. 21]. It is worth quoting at length from the latter. After describing the first- and second-best levels of policy making, the author (Lee H. Endress) continues:-
“Third-best is the world of political economy, wherein costs and benefits directly influence the formation of coalitions that compete for political and economic advantage in society. The pursuit of such advantage is called “rent-seeking” in economics and typically involves activities such as lobbying, public relations campaigns, political contributions, and, sometimes, outright bribery. Unfortunately, the expansion of government that accompanies intervention on second-best grounds can facilitate rent-seeking at the third-best level … A particularly powerful type of rent-seeking coalition, long studied in political science, is termed “the iron triangle” because of the strength of the collaborative relationships among a triad of actors: politicians who seek campaign contributions, votes and reelection; government bureaucrats who aspire to expand fiefdoms and budgets; and private sector interest groups who seek special privileges in the form of political access, favourable legislation, subsidies, protection of monopoly positions, and lucrative government contracts. The iron triangle is durable and impenetrable because it functions as a highly efficient, three-cornered, rent-seeking machine.
Nowhere (except perhaps in healthcare) do third-best politics sink first-best and second-best economic considerations as deeply as in the realm of energy policy. In assessing energy policy in Europe and the United States, Helm (2012) is especially critical of policymakers’ obsession with current technology renewable energy, which is not yet commercially viable without government subsidies and mandates … Consequently, renewables have remained ineffective in lowering energy prices, creating green jobs, and reducing carbon emissions worldwide. The result is high costs for little gain. In a review of Helm’s book, “The Carbon Crunch,” The Economist … highlights Helm’s observation that the entire renewable sector has become an “orgy of rent-seeking.” This outcome is not compatible with the sustainability criterion.” End of quotation from Endress.
Interestingly, in his farewell address president Eisenhower foresaw the dangers from The Iron Triangle when he warned, not only of the risks from the military-industrial complex, but also expressed concerns about planning for the future and the dangers of massive spending and the prospect of the domination of science through state funding and, conversely, the domination of science-based public policy by what he called a “scientific-technological elite”. [Ref. 22].
When you couple well-funded green and other special interest groups’ lobbying [Ref. 23] with group-think and The Iron Triangle it is, perhaps, little wonder that the West’s energy policy is what it is, which is not a happy thought – especially if, as seems to be the case in the West, the mainstream media have been co-opted or suborned by The Establishment.
I have contacted my MP here in the UK to see whether the vice-like grip of lobbyists can be loosened as a first step towards rectifying the situation. In reply I was told, unsurprisingly, that the government currently has no plans to legislate on this matter. Presumably government, civil servants and lobbyists are getting along very well together, albeit at the public’s expense.
References – please forgive the strange numbering!
20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_triangle_(US_politics)#/media/File:Irontriangle.PNG where the interest group could be, for example, a university, an NGO, or a green organisation.
21. Arsenio Balisacan et al. (editors), “Sustainable Economic Development: resources, environment and institutions”, Academic Press, 2014, especially section 3.4.2 by Lee H. Endress, ‘Public policy: prosustainability or not?’, pages 57 -58.
22. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address
23. T. Cave & A. Rowell, “A quiet word – lobbying, crony capitalism and broken politics in Britain”, Vintage Books, 2015.
Regards,
Idiot_Wind.
10
A teachable moment.
Governments all over the world, maybe even OZ & the USA, can learn from this.
Okay, maybe not.
Leaving the room, now.
70
Please tell Josh. He will not admit the RET adds significantly to electricity prices. Bill of course doesnt understand and doesnt care anyway. He wants the Greens to vote for him rather than the lunatic greens.
What annoys me is the Coalition could win easily by scrapping the subsidies now
110
Lawrie
That’s because our prime minister is a merchant banker. They make money trading things. So they create markets. Markets exist to make money.
The truly sad thing is how the unspeakable Libs let him do it.
The Libs can win easily if they dump Malcolm and carbon trading. If they keep him they are history.
10
Watching the news Im getting the impression that Global Warming and renewables is on the way out and plastics are the new thing of the moment. There seems to be something on plastics every night?
90
Yes. The war on plastics is ramping up big time.
40
about time
78
Its just virtue signalling, 90% of plastic entering the oceans come from the Nile, Niger, Indus, Ganges, Amur, Mekong, Pearl, Hai he, Yellow and Yangtze rivers.
An infinitesimal amount of Australian plastic enters the ocean.
61
And a good thing that is too. Now a REAL pollutant is hopefully replacing CO2 which might eventually be generally recognised as the vital gas it is.
22
Like the war on drugs and that success?
10
Yes I’ve noticed that too. I think nations all around the world have finally concluded that base load power, be it nuclear or coal based is essential to the survival of a nation. This is now on top of the fact that hundreds and hundreds of coal fired power stations are being built in many nations thanks mostly to China who never have taken the CAGW view seriously. I’m now wondering which one will come to the same conclusion and really do something about it, Turnbull or Shorten? More likley they will keep ignoring what’s happening overseas and stick to their self-destructive policies. Still one can hope that one of them will either break or be replaced by a leader with the right attitude towards coal and possibly even nuclear power.
61
We can weave the protest stories of the distant past, with those and the recent past and now the present to come up with something along the lines of “Due to global warming, whales are now eating more plastic bags than ever!.” That should cover all bases.
70
Xi is manipulating the world markets, here is a recent example.
‘The world’s most populous country has been the largest importer of recyclable materials, taking in more than 30 million metric tonnes of waste from all over the world, including from the US, EU, Japan, and Australia.
‘But in July, China — also the world’s biggest manufacturer — decided it would no longer take what it called foreign garbage.’
ABC
40
Beware of Greeks, sorry, Chinese bearing gifts!
Perhaps history is not bunk after all, as my namesake Henry Ford once said.
00
Chinese bearing gifts along the Silk Road.
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-01/18/c_136905267.htm
00
Oh, dear! The suckers have learned a salutary lesson, what the government giveth, it also taketh away.
Back to Economics 101, chaps!
00
Three years ago Ed Caryl put together a cost-benefit-analysis of burning fossil fuels.
He compared the Social Benefits of Carbon (SBC) against Social Cost of Carbon (SCC).
Now neither he nor I am saying it is complete or completely accurate assessment but it is both a worthy attempt and, IMO, does point in the right direction.
And that direction is that the Social Benefits of Carbon (SBC) is about 10 to 100 times that of the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC). That is to say burning fossil fuels significantly benefits people’s social and financial outcomes.
See more at http://notrickszone.com/2015/10/15/social-benefit-of-carbon-is-ten-to-a-hundred-times-the-estimated-social-cost/
As I say that was 3 years ago and I’m yet to see any study come up with better figures.
50
bottom line – we need more and bigger batteries!!!
6 Jun: SMH: Too much of a good thing: Solar power surge is flooding the grid
By Cole Latimer
The rising number of solar rooftop installations is creating concerns that too much energy is flooding into the electricity grid, and could cause blackouts as the system struggles to control the excess power.
“Solar spill”, when high levels of energy are generated by rooftop installations in the middle of the day when demand is low, is becoming a problem for Australia’s electricity networks, according to Andrew Dillon, the head of the grid representative body Energy Networks Australia…
“If this goes badly, one of three things is going to happen,” he said at an Energy Networks 2018 event on Wednesday.
“Either we get voltage and frequency issues at the local level or even localised blackouts and things tripping off.”
Or rooftop solar would have to be stopped from coming into the grid or, he said, the networks would have to spend a fortune to have the capacity to deal with it…
Rooftop solar may have to be turned off or curtailed if more batteries are not installed in order to stop a potential flood of energy into the grid and the market operator will need more power of control, energy service company Greensync’s chief executive Phil Blythe told Fairfax Media.
“We have to soak up as much as we can but after that we’ll need to curtail people’s solar,” Mr Blythe said…
The head of the Australian Energy Market Operator, Audrey Zibelman, said the grid is “seeing the equivalent of a new power plant being built every season”.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/too-much-of-a-good-thing-solar-power-surge-is-flooding-the-grid-20180606-p4zjs7.html
30
should have recommended you read all of the Cole Latimer article.
00
They falsely say that the grid is seeing the equivalent of a new power station every season but that simply is not true. No proper power station produces dirty, unreliable randomly fluctuating power like solar and wind.
31
6 Jun: WashingtonFreeBeacon: Republicans Target U.S. Environmental Group Over Connections to China
Group takes ‘adversarial approach’ to U.S., refrains from criticizing Chinese officials
by Natalie Johnson
Two senior Republican members of the House Natural Resources Committee have opened a probe into the Natural Resources Defense Council’s connections to the Chinese government, indicating that the environmental group must register as a foreign agent because of its work to influence U.S. policy on behalf of Beijing.
In a letter sent Tuesday to NRDC President Rhea Suh, Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R., Utah) and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Bruce Westerman (R., Ark.) ordered the organization to turn over any documents related to its dealings with China.
The congressmen said the NRDC “appears to practice self-censorship, issue selection bias, and generally refrains from criticizing Chinese officials” when dealing with environmental issues that involve Beijing, while taking an “adversarial approach” to the United States…
“The Committee is concerned about the NRDC’s role in aiding China’s perception management efforts with respect to pollution control and its international standing on environmental issues in ways that may be detrimental to the United States,” the lawmakers wrote. “The NRDC’s relationship with China has many of the criteria identified by U.S. intelligence agencies and law enforcement as putting an entity at risk of being influenced or coerced by foreign interests.”…
The NRDC defended its operations in China, the world’s No. 1 emitter of greenhouse gases, as a necessary step to protect Americans “against dangerous pollution.”
“As the most populous country on Earth, China has much to do with the kind of world the next generation will inherit, in our country and around the world,” the group said in a statement.
Bishop and Westerman said the probe is part of a broader effort to hinder foreign interference into U.S. energy and environmental policy. NRDC has until June 12 to respond to their letter
http://freebeacon.com/issues/republicans-target-u-s-environmental-group-connections-china/
10
6 Jun: NRDC: NRDC Responds to Letter of Inquiry from House Natural Resources Panel
Media contact: Edwin Chen
WASHINGTON – The following is a statement by Bob Deans, director of strategic engagement at the Natural Resources Defense Council, in response to a letter today from House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop concerning NRDC’s advocacy work in China:
“NRDC seeks environmental solutions that are grounded in sound science, U.S. law and the public interest. We work on behalf of every American to protect our people against dangerous pollution and leave our children a livable world. Those are American values, American goals, and advancing them is manifestly in our national interest, as we have consistently demonstrated for nearly 50 years.
“As the most populous country on Earth, China has much to do with the kind of world the next generation will inherit, in our country and around the world. We’re proud of our work, in China and elsewhere, helping to create a more sustainable future for everyone, and we look forward to discussing that work with Chairman Bishop and the committee.”
###
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Bozeman, MT, and Beijing.
https://www.nrdc.org/media/2018/180605-1
00
6 Jun: GreenTechMedia: Exelon CEO: ‘We Need Federal Intervention’ on Grid Resilience
He cited having “not enough information” to pass judgment on the Trump administration’s leaked proposal to stem the tide of coal and nuclear plant retirements.
by Julia Pyper
Exelon Corp. President and CEO Christopher Crane praised the Trump administration Wednesday for taking action to shore up the nation’s economically distressed coal and nuclear power plants to ensure grid resilience and reliability.
As utilities across the nation increasingly shift to natural gas and renewables, “getting the market design right and looking at the resiliency is really a requirement that we need federal intervention on,” Crane said on stage at the Edison Electric Institute’s annual convention in San Diego.
Utilities don’t have resource planning at the national level to determine which type of power — be it baseload, peaking capacity or renewables — is necessary to meet system needs, as well as to hit targets for affordability and environmental requirements.
“That’s what I think the administration is doing now…not only price formation to make sure the units are adequately compensated, but the resiliency review from the unintended consequences of driving plants out of the stack that we need for reliability,” Crane said…
Exelon owns all or a portion of 16 nuclear power plants across the Eastern U.S…
“This is not a war on gas or a war on renewables; it’s the physics of the system and how it works,” he said Wednesday.
“We have an administration that we greatly appreciate now that recognizes this is an under-analyzed situation, and if we don’t focus on resiliency and national security, we could end up in a very dire situation,” he added…
When asked by reporters if he wanted to see the DOE take emergency action to address power plant retirements Crane said: “We want action. I don’t know how you call it emergency or not emergency — we want action. This administration supports action; we support this administration.” …
“We’re getting a greater dependency on gas, and that’s great for the economy and great for manufacturing, but at the end of the day, we’re going to be held accountable for keeping the lights on and keeping it affordable,” Crane said.
“One thing I know is when we shut a nuclear plant down, it’s never coming back.”
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/exelon-ceo-we-need-federal-intervention-on-grid-resilience#gs.wXGBoh0
10
6 Jun: MarketWatch op-ed: Terry Jarrett: Trump administration taking prudent steps to keep the lights on
If coal and nuclear plants close as planned, U.S. faces electricity shortages this summer
(Terry Jarrett has served on both the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Missouri Public Service Commission)
Opponents are sharpening their knives, but after the fuss and tumble subsides, it will become clear that the president’s move is grounded in sensible and necessary planning. That’s because there are actual question marks hanging over the U.S. power grid right now as to whether it can function reliably over the next 20 years and beyond.
Here’s what the American people are facing. For starters, the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC) is projecting possible electricity shortages (LINK) this summer for both Texas and California. Texas has lost roughly 4.5 gigawatts of coal generation due to recent power-plant retirements. And California is experiencing troubles with natural-gas generation because of ongoing constraints at the critical Aliso Canyon storage facility.
If that weren’t enough, the eastern U.S. power grid narrowly avoided power outages during peak demand this past winter. According to the Department of Energy (LINK), coal-power plants provided 55% of incremental daily U.S. power generation during the harshest parts of frigid winter weather. In fact, the DOE found that “without the resilience of coal plants…the eastern United States would have suffered severe electricity shortages, likely leading to widespread blackouts.”
The winter cold snap that hit the eastern U.S. was so harsh that all 99 of the nation’s nuclear plants were spun into operation at the same time. In the Midwest, some natural-gas power plants had trouble obtaining supplies, forcing outages and an increased reliance on fuel oil. And even hardy New England ran short on fuel oil, with insufficient natural-gas pipeline further complicating the picture.
These are troubling points to ponder since natural gas and renewables have been touted as the panacea for America’s future power grid. But the DOE report found that coal yielded three times the incremental power generation of natural gas and 12 times that of nuclear units. And, wind energy dropped 12% lower during a chilly “bomb cyclone” than during a typical winter period, resulting in a need for “dispatchable” coal generation to make up the difference.
Going forward, though, another 12,000 megawatts of coal-fired power is expected to retire this year. And this raises the important question of preparedness. Coal has proven to be the most reliable, affordable option for electricity generation, with a unique ability to undergird baseload power requirements that can’t simply be dismissed. Coal plants are uniquely resilient in storing on-site fuel supplies and powering nonstop through long-term weather events.
In a nation of more than 325 million people, that’s a crucial consideration…
The administration is absolutely right to shore up baseload power. It’s simply a prudent, necessary step to ensure the viability of the nation’s infrastructure in the years to come.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-administration-taking-prudent-steps-to-keep-the-lights-on-2018-06-04
30
1 Jun: Senator Joe Manchin (Democrat West Virginia): Press Release: Manchin Encouraged by Consideration of Defense Production Act to Save Coal-Fired Power Plants
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) is encouraged that President Trump and the Department of Energy are considering the use of the Defense Production Act and other statutory authorities, to protect only clean-burning coal-fired power plants that have invested in emissions controls and to further ensure our nation’s security. As a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senator Manchin first encouraged President Trump, and U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry and U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis to examine the Defense Production Act in April. The Defense Production Act was enacted on September 8, 1950 at the start of the Korean War. It has been reauthorized over 50 times and is designed to support U.S. civil defense, war mobilization efforts and homeland security, as well as to support emergency management efforts.
“I am glad President Trump and his Administration are considering my idea to use the Defense Production Act to save coal-fired power plants with emissions controls and protect our national security,” Senator Manchin said. “The security of our homeland is inextricably tied to the security of our energy supply. The ability to produce reliable electricity and to recover from disruptions to our grid are critical to ensuring our nation’s security against the various threats facing our nation today – whether those threats be extreme weather events or adversarial foreign actors. The Defense Production Act grants the President the authority to ensure that the nation’s domestic industrial base is capable of providing the essential materials and resources needed to defend our nation and protect our sovereignty and it recognizes energy production and critical infrastructure as strategic and crucial to that goal.”
As recent extreme weather events show, the ongoing loss of additional coal-fired and nuclear power will pose a significant risk to the electric grid because these units provide resilience and essential reliability services to our nation’s electric grid – indispensable attributes to the delivery of electricity in our country. Coal-fired and nuclear power plants continue to do a lot of the heavy lifting when the bulk power system is put to the test. In the case of coal specifically, the National Energy Technology Lab stated that, during the 2018 Bomb Cyclone at the height of peak demand on January 5, 2018, “had coal been removed, a 9-18 GW shortfall would have developed.” NETL went on to conclude that, “In the case of PJM, it can also be shown that the demand could not have been met without coal.”
https://www.manchin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/manchin-encouraged-by-consideration-of-defense-production-act-to-save-coal-fired-power-plants-
20
Only applies to farmers?
May 4, 2018: Queensland Parliament passes land clearing laws
The Queensland government has vowed to work with the agricultural industry after contentious laws restricting farmers’ rights to clear vegetation from their properties passed state Parliament.
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/queensland-parliament-passes-land-clearing-laws-20180504-p4zda6.html
June 5, 2018: Queensland’s biggest wind farm approved, may add solar and storage
https://reneweconomy.com.au/queenslands-biggest-wind-farm-approved-may-add-solar-and-storage-68796/
10
where would we be without our “friend”, theirABC?
7 Jun: ABC: With ACT energy prices rising, here are some things you can do to help ease your power pain
By Jon Healy
With the news that electricity prices are about to rise by as much as $300 a year for many homes in the ACT, you might be looking for a way to avoid getting hit too hard by the increase.
***Odds are you probably can’t get a solar panel installed tomorrow and for many people a one-off payment of that size — even if there are long-term savings — is not realistic.
So here are a few things you can do straight away to keep yourself from being walloped too hard by rising power prices…
Many are obvious — like heating less space, for less time, on a lower setting — but did you know that hitting that minus button on the air conditioner just once can reduce the energy being used by as much as 10 per cent?…
Also, whether you’re hot in summer or cold in winter, curtains are your ***friends…
There are easy things that we don’t always do, like adjusting your washing machine to suit the load you’re doing, rather than just sticking to the settings you always use. Not everything needs a wash-rinse-spin cycle — soaking is your ***friend….
And of course there are the classics that everyone heard growing up — like turning the (bloody) light off when you leave a room, switching things off at the wall or cutting down on showering time by doing something as simple as brushing your teeth after you get out.
So perhaps the moral of the story really is: Listen to your parents.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/act-power-price-rise-easy-changes-to-keep-bills-down/9845320
00
7 Jun: ABC: Canberra heating bills to increase $300 per year on average thanks to hike in electricity prices
By Jake Evans
Canberrans are going to feel the pain of heating their homes this winter, after the independent regulator decided on a 12 per cent price hike in electricity prices for the next financial year.
The decision equates to a $300 increase in annual bills for a typical Canberra household consuming about 8,000 kWh per year.
As the average minimum temperature dips to below 0 degrees Celsius overnight, chief executive of Canberra’s energy retailer ActewAGL, Michael Costello, said he knew it was “already a tough environment” for many people…
“The simple fact is for 14 years the politicians have been arguing about energy policy — all of them, not singling out anybody — [and] they still haven’t got an answer.
“That’s what has contributed more than half of this price increase.”…
Nearly the entire increase is out of the retailer’s hands: more than half is due to a rise in wholesale power prices, ***and a third comes from the growing cost of meeting the national renewable energy target…
But financial assistance groups said their offices were already full of people saying they would be turning off the heat this winter to save money.
“What we’re seeing is an increasing number of people on middle incomes who are contacting our service about problems with paying their energy bills,” said Carmel Franklin, head of Care Financial Counselling…
But Mr Costello said ActewAGL was open to bill discounts of up to 25 per cent for customers who contacted the retailer, alongside its existing joint support fund with the ACT Government.
“I can guarantee anybody in Canberra this: that if they do contact us because they’re struggling, we’ll work with them to find a way through it — there’s no chance they will be disconnected,” he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/canberra-heating-bills-to-increase-300-per-year-on-average/9845720
00
the ***smart State:
7 Jun: ABC: Solar panel surge is overloading the electricity grid and could lead to blackouts: energy group
By Ashleigh Stevenson
A sharp rise in the number of solar rooftop installations in Queensland is flooding the network and could lead to blackouts or frequency issues, Energy Networks Australia says.
Chief Executive Andrew Dillon said the electricity grid was not designed to cope with the amount of energy being generated in the middle of the day when demand is low, resulting in “solar spill”…
“We have almost one in three households in Queensland that have solar panels on their roof and to be honest, by world standards, that is off the chart,” Mr Dillon said.
“Places like Hawaii and California are more like 20 per cent so Queensland is really a world leader.
“So that’s great for renewable energy generation but it’s creating some real challenges for the networks operating the grid when you have that much energy coming back in in the middle of the day.”
Mr Dillon said most networks were created in a time when there was a significant one-way flow from major coal fired power stations into households.
“For a while the network has operated really well to be honest, as a solar sponge being able to soak up this generation — but once we get to certain levels, if we don’t start getting smarter about how we manage it, we will see some technical issues,” he said.
Mr Dillon said if the issue was not addressed, problems could occur.
“The first one is we start to get voltage and frequency issues, which can damage equipment or even localise outages,” he said.
“The second one is we have networks saying to customers wanting to connect solar, ‘No you can’t do it because we’re full’.”
Or, he said, the networks may end up having to spend a fortune to upgrade their facilities.
Queensland Energy Minister Dr Anthony Lynham said the Government had introduced several measures to future-proof the network.
“We have to move the peak that we’re seeing during the middle of the day when we have solar, to that night time cooking peak, and we’re doing that,” Dr Lynham said…
“The big thing we’re doing obviously is the pumped hydro, the big Wivenhoe pumped hydro storage solution. That’s 570 megawatts … that’s a coal-fired power station.
“So during the middle of the day when all the solar panels on roofs are working, we’re storing energy through pumping water up the top of the hill at Wivenhoe and at night time we’re driving it back down.”
Dr Lynham said the Government was taking a ***smart approach to the issue.
“We’re bringing on an interest-free loan scheme for batteries later on this year,” he said.
“Instead of peaking your hot water at night when power used to be cheap, you peak your hot water during the day, you have your pool pump running during the middle of the day when the solar is on.
“And also you can’t have a normal meter installed in a house — if you build a house or change your meter it must be a smart meter so all those controls are available to the household.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/rising-number-of-solar-rooftop-installations-flooding-grid/9845924
10
The AIIB China Infrastructure Bank put poles and wires infrastructure into Bangladesh and gave 12 million rural people electricity, allowing a HK shelf company the opportunity to build a coal fired power station.
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/energy/coal/bangladesh-china-ink-deal-for-coal-fired-power-plant-/19960
The benevolent dictatorship knows the way.
50
More electricity needed
“Climate Proposal: Reduce Food Miles with Urban Food Produced Under Grow Lights”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/06/climate-idea-reduce-food-miles-with-urban-food-produced-under-grow-lights/
20
Just last night I was reading up on recent advances in solar cell tech, and I read, and then excerpted this quote below, taken from within the Wikipedia title page:
Solar Cell Research
“Silicon wafer-based solar cells
Despite the numerous attempts at making better solar cells by using new and exotic materials, the reality is that the photovoltaics market is still dominated by silicon wafer-based solar cells (first-generation solar cells). This means that most solar cell manufacturers are currently equipped to produce this type of solar cells. Consequently, a large body of research is being done all over the world to manufacture silicon wafer-based solar cells at lower cost and to increase the conversion efficiencies without an exorbitant increase in production cost. The ultimate goal for both wafer-based and alternative photovoltaic concepts is to produce solar electricity at a cost comparable to currently market-dominant coal, natural gas, and nuclear power in order to make it the leading primary energy source. To achieve this it may be necessary to reduce the cost of installed solar systems from currently about US$1.80 (for bulk Si technologies) to about US$0.50 per Watt peak power.[12] ”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_research
Quote taken on June 7th 2018 (“Last edited 14 days ago …”).
So despite all the greenie and solar pimp hoo-har about how economically ‘competitive’ solar is, compared with old base load generation techs, the people working at the coal-face of new solar tech know perfectly well that solar PV is VERY FAR from being economically competitive with coal—their numbers.
Coal = $0.50 Wh USD
Current Best Solar = $1.80 Wh USD
That’s ~360% more expensive.
And remember, this is just the difference at the solar cell level of comparison, not the costs of delivery of the whole system attached to those cells.
This information has been out there all along.
Treacherous Australian parties politicians don’t want to know about it. They sure don’t want to tell anyone. And the vile greenies (including the many ignorant else totally corrupt professors) are as usual, in perpetual economic la-la land, sprouting a wall of eekconomic BS, to fig-leaf their despicable perversion. They’d all rather keep stabbing everyone in the back, for as long as possible, and maximise the damage level they can inflict.
And every Parliament in the country continues to enable it.
100
Somewhat off-topic but I’m heading out and just wanted to post this:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/359049/cyclones-slowing-and-intensifying-new-research
Now that all the sacred cows of the crazy Climate Cuckoo Clock have failed to materialise – Arctic temps are below-normal, sea ice volume [largest in 5 years] has grown back to ‘normal’, Greenland’s ice mass growing, it’s still snowing in Canada & Russia in ‘summer’, record cold and snow here in NZ [after a very below-average cyclone season], Antarctica’s frozen as usual – the only thing left to do is… shift the goalposts [oh no, not again!].
“Tropical cyclones are slowing down… 10 percent globally as the planet warms [?] … there was evidence that tropical cyclones were migrating more towards the poles [?] … their very ‘behaviour’ was being affected by climate change.” That old devil carbon now bending Nature’s behavioural patterns? Whoah, that’s spooky social science if I ever done heard.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/06/climate/slow-hurricanes.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
After a little searching [I won’t link some of the more crazier stuff] there was this gem: “There is also the question of what is causing the slowdown. The new paper… does not answer that question… But broader evidence [?] suggests that climate change is playing a role.” Well, duh! – the old suggestibility factor again, huh. The paper’s main author is a certain “Dr.” James Kossin, NOAA, while one of his co-scribblers is an unmentionable, self-chosen conjurer of illusory, mann-made hokey-schticks. Enough said.
61
unconvincing:
6 Jun: Scientific American: Solar Farms Produce Power—and Food
Some crops grow better under raised solar panels than they do in full sun
By Frank Jossi, Ensia
Adding plants to solar farms offers all kinds of benefits to the facilities’ primary aim of reducing carbon emissions and expanding renewable energy. “Solar development is happening on a massive scale as lands are being converted from agricultural land or unused land into solar projects,” says Jordan Macknick, energy-water-land lead analyst with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), which funds research on the impact of native and crop plants grown in solar farms. “That represents an amazing opportunity to improve our agriculture and improve our food security while developing energy at the same time.”…
The experiment found other advantages to the panels as well. The skin temperature of people harvesting crops underneath the panels was 25 degrees cooler than those working out in in the sun, no small matter in a state with scorching summers. And some claim the shade-grown produce tastes better than conventionally grown crops…
Despite the promising results of pilot dual-farm projects the idea of a future where American farms will be covered by solar canopies is not likely anytime soon. Rob Davis is director for the Center for Pollinators in Energy at the nonprofit Fresh Energy in St. Paul. The huge scaffolds holding solar panels cost a great deal of money, he says, and one bad turn by a farm tractor driver hitting a post could bring down hundreds of thousands of dollars of solar panels…
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/solar-farms-produce-power-and-food/
10
Add to unconvincing, I don’t suppose mechanised sewing and harvesting floats copious dust on to said solar panels? Or maybe they mean hemp cropping?
20
Re solar panels causing grid instability and difficult to control. Just add an interrupted at each local transformer so that the houses in a road fed by a transformer , and those houses are causing a problem, just isolate them till the sun goes in a big. Let the panels and inverters sync to themselves…
Oops! You mean they can sync to fellow inverters – oh dear.
20