By Jo Nova
Going Green with Diesel
Back in February, South Australia was the Renewables Wonderland basking in the thrill of driving two diesel plants out of business. The remarkable transition had claimed two new fossil fuel scalps. But the farce of last week’s near blackout in Sydney must have scared the management in South Australia. Suddenly this week, the government announced it wants to change the rules and force those mothballed diesel plants back into action.
The Frankenstein economy fails (again)
The government created a monster — an artificial market that favoured random energy and drove dependable power out of business. So, not surprisingly, now they have to do emergency market surgery and spend even more money, to force Engie to reopen these uneconomic plants.
The fact that essential plants are “uneconomic” only shows what a Quasimodo market this is. If the rules favored the cheap reliable electricity (that customers want) instead of hobgoblin-electrons that change the future weather (maybe), no one would have to order Engie to restart the plants. They wouldn’t have gone out of business. Instead, a bunch of unreliable wind farms and fields of glass would never have been created. No one could afford to build them with their backup or their batteries or their 1,000 miles of wires.
Excuses, excuses
It’s not that the South Australian government has only just realized summer has arrived (unexpectedly in December), apparently it’s because the interconnector they’re building to NSW is 12 months behind schedule. Which might make sense, except it was not scheduled to finish until mid 2026 in any case:
Mr Koutsantonis has warned the forecast for the reliability of power supply in SA this summer – which shows a predicted shortfall of 200 megawatts — has been underestimated because the AEMO has not accounted for the delay in a new interconnector with New South Wales.
It [EnergyConnect] was due to be completed by July 2026 but is currently about 12 months behind schedule.
Somehow we’re supposed to believe the blackout risk is higher this summer because a high voltage line that dead-ends 900 km away should have reached a couple of hundred kilometers closer. Like that would help…
In the next breath the Energy Minister admitted that this is really about what happened in Sydney last week:
Mr Koutsantonis argued energy operators needed greater powers to bring back thermal generators “to address reliability risks arising during the peak demand periods expected from December 2024”.
Speaking on 5AA radio on Monday, Mr Koutsantonis said: “given what happened in New South Wales last week, when they had one 40 degree day and they were nearly short on power, and told people to turn their air conditioners off and not turn dishwashers on, if we rely on an interconnector to New South Wales and it’s hot across the entire national electricity market, we’re in trouble”.
The South Australian Energy Minister has just realized that even when the $2 billion dollar interconnector is finished, they don’t want to rely on our most populated state’s electricity grid, because it’s a debacle.
Is this the moment when the fantasy of saviour interconnectors came undone?
South Australia has walked the plank right out to 70% renewable energy, a feat only possible because of they are just 6% of a larger stable system. So far the baseload power in other states could keep the lights on in South Australia, and interstate homes and factories could soak up their excess solar and wind power. But every state can’t play the same game at the same time.
South Australia was the Show Pony for renewable energy, but it was an illusion based on reliable energy hidden in other states.
Now finally the Energy Minister of South Australia gets it:
“Every state should have sufficient capacity to look after itself first and not rely on other jurisdictions,” he said.
These two diesels plants are not large, but in South Australia every little bit of dependable energy matters. Engie, the French electricity giant owns the 75 megawatt (MW) Port Lincoln plant and the 63MW Snuggery plant that were closed in July this year.
Apparently they were mothballed after the Federal government got puritanical about their “capacity investment scheme” they ruled out fossil fuel generators. (Reneweconomy) But we didn’t need “capacity investment schemes” before we had renewable subsidies, and if we had a free market in “capacity” the diesel generators could still have saved the day. At this point, we’re up to second and third order screwiness in this market. There are bandaids on the bandaids and no end in sight.
h/t OldOzzie, Neville, David Cooyal in Oz
In other words, deformed, like the Hunchback of Notre Dame (Notre Dame incidentally is back in the news this week).
220
….indeed and let us hope that Paris is not the scene of another door forever closing.
Deep breath people the door to future freedom/truth/honesty faces a big danger this weekend.
90
Crikey, I remember that South Australia, with much fan fare
and a video, blew up perfectly good coal fired power stations
not that long ago.
And “borrowed” 150 diesel generators from Tasmania. They both needed them,
big time, in 2016. Fortunately for them at different times of the year.
You reap what you sow.
Lock open the inter-connectors to South Australia.
270
I remember that too. So why did Australians vote in favour of blowing up power stations?
30
I didn’t!
I am angry every time we drive down to East Gipsland and see the wasteland where Hazelwood existed.
70
Hazlewood generated about 25% of base load electricity for Victoria.
30
“It [EnergyConnect] was due to be completed by July 2026 but is currently about 12 months behind schedule.”
Well, lets build more in Australia and stop importing from China… Oh wait… We can’t even string wires across the country reliably, never mind build pump storage. It would be interesting to see who is at fault with the delay.
180
The SA renewables enthusiasts still claim that the purpose of the interconnectors is to allow SA to supply “cheap” renewable power to other states. But the true reason that SA wants these interconnectors is for other states to continue supporting SA when their own renewables cannot supply sufficient power. I recall Koutsantonis being very worried when Heywood was out of action for only a few days.
80
LPG augmented diesel works very well in big cars. I knew a mechanic with a V8 Range Rover who had added an LPG tank and a big butterfly valve in the air intake. As you opened the throttle above idle the butterfly valve allowed more and more gas into the intake air. His main reason was the cheap cost of LPG but he said it helped the diesel burn completely and gave the engine more power.
In a nation with more gas than we could possibly use it would seem like a fair option for the back-up grid generators but initial conversion costs are quite high. With diesel at $1.80 and gas at $1.10 it takes several years of high milage to break even.
81
A gas turbine electrical generator can probably be adapted to run on any fuel, including natural gas.
I hope they don’t actually use diesel fuel. That should be kept for road transport.
70
Even the WA SWIS grid, with its plentiful supply of cheap gas, occasionally adds diesel to their power mix.
20
I underetand that the very large generators South Australia had installed in the old GMH Holden factories at Elizabeth, suburb of Adelaide, were Diesel-Gas fuelled.
10
I wonder about schemes like this, they sound great, cleaner burning etc. My question relates to the latter. If the diesel burns better, is it burning hotter?
If yes, then is there a chance that the car is producing excess nitrous oxide(s), these are typically formed in high temperature ignition situations.
It would be good to know if your friend had the NO(1/2) levels tested at the time of the conversion, it’s likely, (as you note), that there are less unburnt hydrocarbons in the exhaust but has your friend now introduced a smog inducer?
Be great to hear back on this. Especially if the full modification was available commercially too.
30
A diesel 4WD vehicle I owned until 2012 was fitted with Diesel-Gas injected system and about 20% LPG to Diesel mix, the results from more efficient use of the Diesel fuel in the engine were much lower particulate emissions and therefore at the rear wheels measured on a dynamometer was 20% power and torque increase.
Fuel consumption was slightly improved with Diesel-Gas switched on, towing a heavy fibreglass boat trailer was noticeably easier for the vehicle.
00
The thing is, they do not learn.
Past premier Weatherall went through this loop a few years ago when the light came on that lights might go out going into a summer election (after having strutted and preened about destroying a working coal plant) This led to a spending spree on gas/diesel plants and a battery purchase.
Scroll forward a few years and now its the diesel plants and its rinse and repeat, with more sumner panic stations. On top of this they have a cargo cult attitude about the NSW interconnector, thinking it is a answer to their issues instead of just bringing a new range of issues, cost and complexity as they connect two unstable systems together.
Perhaps if VIC had only been able to provide variable “renewable” power across the VIC-SA interconnect they may have seen the future. Probably not though due to the demonstrated fact that they can not learn.
220
One thing that we learn from history is that we don’t learn from history. ToM
210
What is the point of an inter-connector from SA to NSW when NSW rarely ever generate enough power to meet demand ?
What am I missing?
330
Exactly.
120
Three reasons to spend $2b on an interconnector:
1. Two big connections to the national grid mean SA is less likely to blackout again.
2. SA can dump excess renewables in NSW which threaten SA (and force out some more NSW reliable generators).
3. Thousands of square kilometers of land now become available for more solar plants, batteries and windmills.
Plus it makes it easier to build a few EV high speed chargers in outback NSW. A bonus.
Follow up questions: Who pays and who benefits.
Electricity prices are raised across the board. But property developers and renewable shareholders benefit and Big Government gets bigger.
100
You can swap electrons with Vicdanistan after going via SA.
Maybe they think they can extract a toll on them?
And NSW will be on the way to at least one LESS coal fired power station by the time the cable is finished, 2026+1. Eraring is due to close in August 2027.
Then what? Do all states demand diesel power plants? Just to defeat coal.
190
I bet that Erari my will be extended further. NSW cannot afford to close it. It provides so much Electrical power.
80
Eraring should be closed.
The sooner the grid goes dark, the better.
It’s the only way people will wake up.
Don’t prolong the misery.
181
Better the NEM than SWIS
10
Couldn’t agree more – Rip that bandaid off!
10
The Eraring unit that was supposed to be returned to service has been delayed and will remain out of service until the end of this week.
40
Whoops. Typing from my ‘not so smart phone’ and auto text took over, Should have typed ‘Eraring’.
00
Personally I think a couple of gas plants should’ve been built in SA years ago and the last coal plant should still be operating.
Of course no toxic unreliable W & S at terrible cost because they’re unreliable and only last 15 to 20 years. Oh and ditto for the rest of Australia.
In time Nuclear is the only answer if you think co2 reduction matters, but the so called developing world couldn’t care less about co2 reduction. Just look up the data.
270
They could have kept the Northern power station mothballed, it wasn’t that old and there’s still coal available at Leigh Creek but because coal was the enemy of renewables, it had to go.
Bet they’re regretting it now, the NSW wobble really put the wind up them.
110
They did !
The Torrens Island coal plant was demolished and replaced with 4 large (211 MW) gas fueled generator units ( known as Barker Point)
SA has a total of nearly 2.9 GW of gas fueled generation !
00
I did have a screenshot of South Australia’s energy mix from the AEMO dashboard showing around 18% diesel powered generation , actually happened quite a bit during a time of high demand where there was no solar and wind was 1% .
Must see if I still have it .
70
Again the world has only 403 operating Nuclear plants so far and yet have to build another 9500 by 2050 to achieve their net zero fantasy.
That’s one new plant operating per day every day for the next 25 years.
Anyone like to bet on that mission impossible by 2050?
But hundreds of new coal plants have been built over recent years and many hundreds to come by 2050.
When will they start to think?
170
The Chicomms are building two coal plants per week with no end in sight. They can also build a 2GW USC coal plant in 18 months to 2 years, although in Australia, given feral unions, massive over-regulation, litigation, and the NIMBY syndrome, that is more likely to be 15 years and probably 30 years for nuclear.
Recall that the decision for a second Sydney Airport took about 50 years.
Electricity will continue to get more expensive as more toxic wind, solar and Big Batteries are added.
Australia will remain in full self-destruct mode until the lights go out.
190
I read a comment from an engineer who has been working in China building nuclear power stations that recently a former coal fired power station was converted to SMR technology.
10
Plans for interconnector lines are in trouble in Victoria as well.
We’ve organised a statement and map that show 150km of the proposed VNI West path is blocked. The statement says we will not negotiate or comply and is signed by the landowners.
TCV/AEMO are continually misrepresenting the project and their progress so far. We’ve got the people, they’ve got the spin.
310
Thanks Farmer Gez and even their clueless ABC gave a good coverage to the intelligent majority this morning.
I hope you win and please keep up the pressure and try Sky news as well.
140
The government will enforce it.
They are labor, they hate farmers. It’s all over. If you think this is going to end any other way, then you are dreaming. Rubber bullets and legislation are coming, watch this space, (and who knows which order those two will occur in).
82
Great news. I note that despite claims that underground HVAC is too expensive, a recent comment was that it’s only 50% more expensive. If that’s true, then why aren’t we looking at underground HVAC for these long distances?
20
Did that comment provide references?
Underground power costs depend upon many things. Voltage, distance, soil moisture (cooling effect) etc.
Whether or not it might be primary transmission, secondary transmission, primary distribution, or secondary distribution, all of it matters, at voltage and current. One cannot simplify a complex situation.
Ultimately, the cost for underground vs. overhead power is an order of 4 to 10 times greater cost. Initially. Maintenance and repair costs are greater. On a secondary distribution line (4 to 5 kV), it might be feasible. Above that voltage and power dissipation, likely not.
https://www.tdworld.com/intelligent-undergrounding/article/21215620/overhead-or-underground-transmission-that-is-still-the-question
90
Thanks for the link.
Ted Woodley made the claim recently in his article in The Australian 29 November “HumeLink blowout makes a mockery to our energy transition”: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/humelink-blowout-makes-a-mockery-to-our-energy-transition/news-story/a6765325cc2ebecafd4f1902fbd2f843
The relevant paragraph is: “Undergrounding is an alternative design increasingly applied for long-distance transmission in many overseas grids, especially by direct current. However, both TransGrid and AEMO are dismissing this alternative, claiming excessive capital costs, despite a detailed study by international experts concluding the extra cost for HumeLink is about 1.5 times or less…”
30
Lance, do you have Part 2 of the article?
20
Yes.,
https://www.tdworld.com/intelligent-undergrounding/article/21234716/to-use-overhead-or-underground-transmission-that-is-still-the-question-part-ii
Requires signing up for a free account.
00
The really silly thing about this is ever mothballing a Diesel Generator for “green” reasons. Especially in somewhere warm.
The machine is not the fuel even though both have “Diesel” (a man) in their name.
Properly, the machine is a “compression ignition engine” and the typical fuel is “light fuel oil”.
Turns out the machine can run on many fuels, some of them “green”. (I’ve done a lot of strange fuels in my diesels, from propane to ethanol and kerosene to Crisco – really, I ran a 1980 International Harvester Scout with a Nissan 6 cyl Diesel on Crisco cut with kerosene…)
So one can relatively easily take used “chips” oil (French fries in the USA) and convert it to methyl-ester or ethyl-ester of fatty acids – AKA “bio Diesel”. Then run your Diesel Generator on Green! Recycled! Chip Oil!. More than that, one can convert trash to oil too. At least, IF you were awake and paid attention in Chemistry Class…. (we know who did not… they went into politics…)
There is NOTHING wrong with “Diesel Generators” and there is even nothing not “green” about them. All one needs to do is change the fuel you feed to them (IFF you are from Gang Green and MUST have a GREEN!!! solution – the machine can live with that… and you can have stable “green” power…)
251
Turbines are similar, it if can be pumped and it burns, then it can be made to work.
I suppose one exception, it has to burn, NOT detonate. eg NOT nitro glycerine, even if it does burn.
20
All correct, but there is not enough waste cooking oil to run the generators and growing bio-fuels is not economical as has been shown numerous times. Australia’s exoeriment in biofuels, still ongoing, is ethanol production as an additive to petrol. This was introduced by the fake conservative Little Johnnie Howard of the fake conservative Liberal Pary decades ago and taxpayers are still subsidising it.
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/a-disgrace-of-the-old-school-20030816-gdh99d.html
80
Diverting crops to alcohol only makes sense to alcoholics and subsidy thieves.
120
Industry name for diesel is Middle Distillate.
20
All true but,..
…the generators in question in SA (Port Lincoln and Snuggery) are both “dual fuel” Open Cycle turbines.
So running them on gas is not an issue !
00
This. Exactly this.
Who *ever* needed the Feds to step in and mismanage some phony market? I spell Feds with a capital F because a capital F pretty much sums them up.
130
Energy expert Steve Goreham tries to educate us on these so called wonder fuels of the future, but alas it’s just more BS and nonsense.
Hydrogen is a disaster to transport anywhere and the extreme low temps or incredible pressures required just create another very dangerous workplace fantasy.
See at 20 minutes of the video link.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAWJsAKyiO4&t=363s
100
Not that I have anything against South Australia but somebody has to go first.
SA is the dummy the other crash test dummies should look up to or is that down upon.
And as always I quibble when any rational person uses the term “renewable energy” when “intermittent energy” if far more apt.
190
Hydrogen as a ‘wonder fuel’ is only ever promoted by idiots who know absolutely nothing about it.
100
It’s insane using a valuable transport fuel like diesel to generate electricity.
It’s probably the most expensive way to produce electricity, likely more expensive than even wind or solar, the other most expensive way.
Relatively cheap fuels such as coal, gas or nuclear should be used, or real hydro (not SH2).
180
Diesel generation is not cheap. About 1 USD/kWh. Only do it if there are no other, cheaper, options.
https://www.ourgeneratorworld.com/archives/1353
40
Which could be why the remote mining sites will install wind/solar generation even if the need to clean the panels is an added cost. Cost of diesel and transport to remote sites is $$$
20
One solar installation at a WA mining site was covered in dust and unusable in just 48 hours. Admittedly, it was at their main worksite, where a lot of dust was being stirred up by passing traffic.
Some minesites have tried cleaning the panels by hand, but in the very hot sun it hasn’t worked out. Some were going to introduce automated cleaning, but that’s an expensive option, and it seems that the panel installation has to be built to suit auto cleaning in the first place.
60
Long ago (about 30 years?) I noticed an odd correlation. This was in California, USA, but the relationship has held. Likely the Rest Of World would need to do some units conversions 😉
The price of a Gallon of Diesel Oil in $ Dollars US, was roughly 10 times the cost of electricity produced with it in small portable Diesel Generators per kilo-Watt hr.
So, IF you (for example) had a 12 kW Honda portable generator (a great machine, BTW) and were feeding it Diesel fuel (#2 fuel oil in the USA) at $3.50 per gallon (US): it took about 35 ¢ of fuel per kW-hr of electricity produced. (Yes, this ignores capital costs and maintenance)
That useful relationship has held up over many decades and many contexts. Probably because fuel refining and Diesel engine are mature technologies.
So yes, using a great Motor Fuel for electricity generation in a light Diesel engine is a bit daft compared to using it in trucks. And yes also, there are much cheaper fuels. BUT if the alternative is sitting in the dark as your freezer full of food melts…. just Sayin’…
Also, FWIW, one can “fumigate” fuels into the air intake (using the “Diesel” oil like a spark plug to ignite it) as long as they have a high enough “octane” rating to not detonate (“ping”) upon compression.
I’ve done this with Propane (in the I.H. Scout turbo Diesel mentioned above) and with ethanol (in a Volvo Penta boat Diesel). At one time (and maybe still) Caterpillar sold large (mall sized) standby Diesel generators that did this with Natural Gas. I saw one at a shopping mall near my home 20-ish years ago.
The “key bit” is just to stay away from a proper stoichiometric mix ratio, so about 75% of “full fuel” via the fumigated fuel (of well over 100 octane rating…) and the rest via the Diesel injection fuel. The other key bit is to only use high “octane” fuels like natural gas, propane, and ethanol so that they do not pre-ignite. Then “Polish points” are things like not using a Very High Compression engine beyond the octane rating of the co-fuel being fumigated (so use an 18:1 or even 20:1 compression ratio but not a 40:1 engine) and do not use it with an air preheat box (Dodge Cummins trucks) but instead in a glow plug engine in cold weather. i.e. running a fuel air mix over glowing wires in an air heater box is a bad idea…
Engines of lower compression (like an old 1980’s Mercedes Diesel) of the pre-combustion chamber type (Ricardo Diesels) seem to work best with such fuels. “Common Rail” direct injection engines not so much. Anything with a computer controlled system, especially with a lot of fuel sensors, will barf at it as it is outside the “design parameters” given to the programmer… But your run of the mill giant electrical generation Diesels tend to be the kind that like “co-fuels” a lot
FWIW, my experimentation with such fuels was the result of reading a Masters Thesis paper in the University Of California Berkeley Engineering Library in about 1973. Said engineer using methane (natural gas) fumigated into large stationary Diesel generators. So this isn’t my idea, it was his.
I posted about it in the energy category of the old UUCP based “net news” (sci.energy?) in about 1984 and later saw that Caterpillar started making standby generators with this as a feature (natural gas pipelines often working well after #2 fuel oil deliveries stop in earthquake “issues”). FWIW there was a Cat Engineer reading the “energy” news group then. Good on him for picking this up and running with it. The point? This has been known for a long long time, it works well, and has been commercialized at least once to good effect (and by a major corporation). So while I did “redneck engineering” experiments, the process and the technology are far more formal.
So yes, one can relatively easily use very cheap Natural Gas in a Diesel generator and make cheap reliable electricity that way. One need not use a lot of valuable fuel oil.
30
That 1 USD/kW is an approximation that includes: Fuel, lube oil, maintenance, generator amortization, costs. Modeled on Cat XQ 1250 genset, at 75% load. Fuel cost only is about 30 Cents US / kWh.
00
If South Australia really is the renewables paradise, why don’t they disconnect from the interconnectors to Victiria and hydrocarbon fuels (Murraylink, Heywood and another under construction)?
The South Australian Government are lying about their energy independence and should be taken to task, especially as there is another interconnector under construction to make three. (Project EnergyConnect, 800 MW.)
In the civilian world, such huge lies related to commercial operations would have drastic legal consequences. Why should politicians and senior public serpents be allowed to get away with lying?
As usual with any conception of the Left, the hypocrisy is staggering. Rule #1. Just about any utterance from a Leftist can be assumed to be a lie unless proven otherwise.
And it’s reminiscent of Nineteen Eighty Four.
120
“If South Australia really is the renewables paradise, why don’t they disconnect from the interconnectors.”
Same reason the ACT claims 100% renewables but won’t disconnect, it’s all hype and they know they couldn’t survive out there in the wilderness.
160
Question and they invoke Mis/Dis information defence
20
Surely using Australian Gas is the best for SA to use as they now have no Coal Fired Power Stations. Using diesel is bonkers.
70
I believe SA has about 2.4GW generation capacity capability from Gas (vs peak demand of about 2.6GW) and no doubt would use gas for main generation when renewables are not producing.
I believe the two diesel generators (combined capacity of about 140MW) are only being looked at as a stabilising supply to respond to fluctuations in renewable supply given the flukey nature of them.
30
Does SA have any combined cycle gas generators, or are they all inefficient open cycle units?
10
SA has three combined cycle generators total 843MW capacity.
00
“bring back thermal generators”
Okay do it.
50
Frankly, I’m surprised that the SA Government mothballed the diesel plants rather than blow them up in a “spectacular” public display for the Lamestream Media and dumbed-down masses, like they did with the Port Augusta coal plant.
Luddites.
170
Because they are likely Open Cycle turbines, they can be loaded up and sold on.
30
Our current electricity disasters are caused by people voting idiots who believe in Global Warming, Santa, and the Tooth Fairy into parliament. People in Adelaide have been particularly prone to this error over many years.
190
Let’s hope the new interconnector is made with sub-standard cheap Chinese steel and it falls over when the wind blows like the Heywood one did. Don’t allow SA to cheat by importing electricity.
140
What will SA do as the neighbours get more unstable, a big wobble in NSW might do them in.
40
South Australia is waking up to the fact that the rest of the grid is in the same sorry state as theirs. And possibly that energy ministers in other States will give their voters second highest priority after Canberra.
Gas shortages on the east coast are now looming large. From the ACCC:
The little chart on page 5 for the long term supply outlook will be causing responsible energy ministers (assuming there are some) to be concerned about re-election.
https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/gas-inquiry-june-interim-gas-inquiry-report_1.pdf
I am reasonably confident that Also and Blackout will be gone before the SHTF.
The charade of South Australia supplying NSW with free energy via the upgraded link is now clearly exposed for its real purpose – exporting their intermittency to make money from it. It gives the intermittent generators access to the pockets of the NSW consumers so they can be robbed to extinction through their electricity bills.
As usual, hands up those who think the retail cost of electricity is headed downward soon! Blackout and Also do not count. They are both simpletons.
110
Australia shouldn’t have a gas shortage.
I will remind readers that it was the fake conservative Little Johnnie Howard of the fake conservative Liberal Party who gave away much of our gas supply to the Chicomms at the world’s cheapest prices on a bizarre 30 year contract with no provision for inflation or market prices.
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/how-australia-blew-its-future-gas-supplies-20170928-gyqg0f.html
100
And it was John Howard who legislated the $100Bn ripoff in our electricity prices so we paid for all the windmills and solar panels but we have to pay again to use the ‘free’ electricity. It’s the reverse of privatisation, government ordered hidden theft going eternally to private people, tax free. No one is accountable and the victims have no idea. About as evil as it gets.
160
Never Let it be forgotten that it was Howard that started Australia on the road to economic ruin.
He planted the seeds for the future economic destruction of Australia.
-He banned nuclear power in law (the second time the fake conservative Liberal Party banned nuclear power).
-Allowed non-dispatchable generators to connect to the grid.
-Created an ethanol subsidy which taxpayers are still paying.
-Introduced world-parity petrol pricing which meant and means Australians pay much more for transport fuels.
-Gave away our gas supply to the Chicomms.
-Signed the Kyoto Protocol (but did not ratify it.)
I’m sure I’ve missed some.
He was an energyphobe and control freak.
120
What I find amazing over the last 37 years is that this conjecture of man made CO2 and CO2 made Global Warming has never been proven.
All of the damage to our power supplies has been done by politicians on both sides, socialist and conservative. Most actual scientists with knowledge of the field have said nothing. No one has proven the idea. Or proven that humans can actually change CO2. All evidence is against man made CO2. This is the graph of CO2 with zero impact from any human activity in the last 50 years.
For example NASA has found world tree coverage increased 14% when CO2 increased 14% between 1988 and 2014. So growing billions of trees does not affect CO2. The legislated (Australian and the UK) tree growing scheme for Carbon Credits has no basis in science.
But far worse are all the Carbon Credit levies buried in every price, up to 35% penalties on CO2 buried in every bill you pay. Partly as they cannot gouge more out of your electricity prices.
Blowing up just one more coal power plant will bring Australia to its knees. . And the interconnectors are needed so Federal politicians can control the whole country as electricity was once a state only affair. The only real power is then in Canberra, which is the whole idea. States can be shut down on a whim.
No science. All of it, starting with Presidential Candidate Al Gore’s RAPID end of world horror story to Congress on 30th June 1988 just Political Science Fiction. 37 years ago!
And don’t politicians love it. Like the Wuhan Flu. And the power it gives, allowing politicians to control every aspect our our lives. Until they realise they are powerless too.
South Australia Premier Peter Malinauskas has just realised that he’s Canberra’s patsy! There’s one born every day.
210
Yes. Isn’t it interesting that we were all going to die in a thermal runaway world in LESS THAN 12 YEARS!!! for the last 40 or so years….
FWIW, I’d count that as an existence proof that the Chicken Little GloBull Warming thesis is a scam.
Where are all the catastrophic events we were promised 40 years ago? Hmmm?
It is clearly a scam and clearly failed all of the predictions. So time to move on…
[Email coming Chiefio! – Jo]
90
As an interested reader but minimal contributor to this site, I believe that those prophecies over what is now such an extended period that we should be seeing some of the dire consequences coming to fruition, but we see none, is the achilles heel that will eventually enlighten the public that it has been snowed for years.
The applied science from many fields that we read here is interesting to those reinforcing their belief in the AGW as fraud, as with me, will probably not seep into public domain. The science we read is why government forced developments fail. There are so many failures that it may appear surprising the public isn’t in revolt. Especially with the costs to taxpayers and consumers. The problem is most of the public seems still driven by the fear campaign, hooked on how to pay the demands and feels it can’t question the governments. It can’t follow every snippet of a million arguments even if it tried to. So EM Smith I think your line of questioning is what will eventually turn the tide. It’s all a matter of poor personal outcomes building to ask those questions of the politicians and demanding answers and not the current rubbish hype we get.
I think the pressure will be rise in the community about all the failed prophecies IF THEY ARE REPEATEDLY POINTED OUT TO IT. The huge and building personal costs along with the loss of services and demands to not use power when it is appropriate to use it will mold a community very open to online podcast or social media information gathering on the current climate game.
With Elon and now the Facebook owner reporting to the feared Trump I think the censorship teams will be increasing sacked.
The game resembles mass hysteria in people that haven’t sought or are incapable of finding such relevant information and applying the questioning. A community antagonised by costs, failures, political lies and mis/disinformation will be an angry community and it can’t be much longer before the turning begins.
40
https://sobernation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/band-aids-compressed.jpg
I liked the bandaid analogy. 🤠
30
Just listened to the start of the VIC ABC Country hour and more lunacy from some very stupid Gippsland farmers.
They don’t want Nuclear and don’t want unreliables either, but okay if you destroy the ocean environment with toxic wind, that can peel off large chunks of their blades in very quick time.
Again, Nuclear is the safest base-load energy in the world and is very cheap compared to toxic W & S and has CFs of 93% +, but these so called farmers sound like any other stupid lefties in the cities.
Ted O’Brien the member for Fairfax certainly has his work cut out trying to talk to these ignorant donkeys.
90
Here’s the death rates from all energy sources and Nuclear is the safest BASE-LOAD energy in the world and easily as safe as the TOXIC W & S disasters.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh
50
Those numbers are rubbish … the reference they give is not openly available and the calculations are completely opaque.
It sure as heck isn’t “the death rates” … more like some very implausible estimate of death rates, based on who knows what?
31
There’s a percentage of farmers who have swallowed the whole Climate change scam and don’t understand the ramifications of all the green tape they are likely to endure. They’re the same lot who put ” Shut the gate” notices on their fences preventing on shore gas exploration. Minority ( I think ) but really noisy and very short sighted. They also tend to accept all that they are told by government and scientific agencies. Then there’s the others, trying to block wind turbines and powerlines who understand. Plus now, the Cattle Council of Australia ( Grass fed beef producers ) who are providing some push back to the methane/cows hoax.
130
Ross I agree that the majority of Aussie farmers would support reliable, safe Nuclear against the unreliable toxic W & S disasters, but the minority are really dumb.
I’m afraid Ted O’Brien has a hard job ahead of him convincing the noisy know nothing donkeys.
40
There is NOTHING wrong with coal power. Never was. Or gas. Or fracking. Or shale. Or peat. Or trees.
I am amazed that everyone is talking nuclear when we could build coal power quickly. No more transmission lines, solar panels, windmills. And we could consume half as much coal with half as much CO2 using HELE plants, giving Albanese his Net Zero. As if that mattered. Crucifying Australians for using coal and gas is just insanity. Everything we need is in place. Rebuild Liddell, Hazelwood, more. Find more gas.
Plus Victoria could export billions a year in brown coal.
Only our governments are stopping this.
Even people commenting here and farmers accept the idea that there is something wrong with CO2 and we must transition to nuclear when coal is our biggest export? And nuclear has no emissions? Really? Nuclear runs on toxic emissions.
Both legs are being pulled. I am stunned.
180
When you have more than 500 years supply of brown coal, even building HELE plants is not warranted. Who cares if the old plants are 20% less inefficient, if like Victoria, you have centuries of supply. Hazelwood Power Station could have happily chugged away for the next 20 years with good maintenance.
90
Correct. My point is that if Alabanese really wanted to reduce fossil fuel Co2 by 50% and most of the electrical power today output is coal produced, moving to HELE would give him what he wanted. So he is lying. Why is another question.
And the cost of moving to HELE is less than the >$20Bn Snowy II which generates no power at all and losses on charging it are 40%. And we would not need any windmills or solar or another 30,000km of transmission lines.
So it is all a lie. Net zero is an excuse to cripple Australia. This war on the West is being waged by China. As if that is not obvious.
90
don’t forget that farmers have enough (likely marginal) land to support going off grid. The cost of new connections in the regional SWIS areas mean that the cost of off grid does need to calculated.
I challenge those in high rise ACT apartment blocks to go off grid.
60
So South Australia is what a “renewable energy superpower” is all about. Look out the rest of Australia as we head towards tweedle dumb and tweedle Dee’s plans for the rest of the country to follow that target and Australia is set to become a renewable energy superpower. No idea how we’re going to make any $$$ to pay our social costs along with the expansive public service. How are we going to export something that’s so cheap that is free. We should be the manufacturing capital of the world because our renewables are Sooooo cheap and that makes our power cheap as well, odd I haven’t seen that happening.
SA is currently 74% solar, 15 % wind and 11% gas, yet the cost is $40.50. I know, I know, Simon will tell me that because it’s based on the most expensive energy source at the time – gas. Still makes no sense when they are running at 89% renewable, which is free and cheap so right now their costs should be in the negative!
40
Remember that is just the generation cost,..not the commercial/retail cost that customers have to pay.
00
SA’s power is so cheap because of all the reliables. Manufacturing is close to being doomed there. A dairy manufacturing co just shut down with a loss of 150 jobs. Energy costs were part of their problem – I’d read that their energy costs had blown out by 300%. It’s just not sustainable!
120
Manufacturing is energy + refined metals .> product. It all relies on cheap energy. Which is being deliberately destroyed. Australia is being destroyed. Is it all to save the planet? That doesn’t make sense even if CO2 was deadly. Our total output is 2%. China’s output is 40%. And we are shipping the coal and buying the windmills. It’s nonsense.
80
It may be nonsense but it’s evil nonsense.
20
How much longer will criticism of the energy policies of governments around the world be permitted?
U.K. Government Pours Big Sums into Latest UN Crackdown on Climate Dissent
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/12/04/u-k-government-pours-big-sums-into-latest-un-crackdown-on-climate-dissent/
“The British Government is one of the main financial backers of a new international campaign designed to suppress online climate science scepticism ahead of next year’s ‘make-or-break’ COP30 in Brazil. Run by the United Nations and UNESCO, the Global Initiative for Information Integrity on Climate Change was signed off at the recent G20 Summit in Brazil. Part of its remit will fund non-profit outfits rooting out so-called disinformation and promoting ‘public awareness campaigns’. Commenting on the campaign, the UN’s global communications flack Melissa Fleming noted that a growing number of people are waking up to the harms caused by climate disinformation and “toxic information ecosystems in general”. She suggested that a global movement for “information integrity is gaining momentum”. “
20
Thank you Australia. Some major first world society has to completely fail due to energy stupidity before pols in the balance of the free world even begin to understand “It’s not easy being green”. California and New York have utterly stupid policies, but also surrounding states with extra capacity. EU has generally failed, only to prove that they didn’t have an economy robust enough to notice the failure. Lots of third world countries are having progress in general blocked by green energy instead of real energy; who cares if in the countryside folks are still burning dung to cook. So OZ, with it’s splendid image from halcyon days still at the forefront of most western thought, may be the best candidate. I know it will go hard on you, but think of how much good you will do for the rest of the world. And I expect you are still resourceful enough to cobble together something to get by after the signal debacle.
/sarc
30
“Potential Solution”…that alone cracked me up.
There simply must be a way to hold these people accountable for the havoc they create. And it must go beyond simply voting them out…that’s nothing but Whack-A-Mole. They just pop up somewhere else.
There needs to be an amendment to a country’s constitution that allows them to be found guilty of performing negligent acts against a population, and prevents them from having further influence.
That would get rid of a lot of the grifters over time.
30
Good one Jim.
I’ve heard the term Whack A Mole before but the context of your comment gives it meaning.
I can now imagine politicians heads poking up out of the ground with voters trying to smack them with brooms.
We need accountability, urgently.
00
All ok in SA overnight. Wind delivering 111% of demand, gas 10%, surplus sent to Vic.
But in Vic, NSW and Qld, coal delivering 80-85% of demand.
00
What gets me is the dedication of the ruling classes to “absolutism”. Australia was a small contributer to global CO2 from domestic electricity production when it was all coal, oil and gas. We need to retain some of this for “firming” of the present bad choice of wind and solar which are intermittent and unpredictable.
A reasonable path would allow and even encourage fossil fuel firming, but NO! it has to be absolutely demonised and absolutely demolished and absolutely dynamited to rid the system of it. This is what you get when you fill the minds of ignorant activists with hateful propaganda.
Very little actual harm (and a lot of benefit) would happen if we patched up the obvious problems of W&S with a guilt-free, openly-favoured program of immediately building the best designs of fossil fuel generators in the best locations to minimise electricity costs.
I dislike writing this because it is a belated patch up for a deliberate policy problem, the policy to transition to W&S in the first place. My preferred solution is to immediately drop the “net zero carbon by 2050” absolute plan and open a free market allowing every form of electrical generation on an even footing, no subsidies, no propaganda.
What on earth is the value of government people prohibiting viable alternatives like coal or nuclear? The way to optimise is by open competition. It is the best way to show what is best, beats political dogma enforcement.
Geoff S
30
Dutton Plan
https://www.australianeedsnuclear.org.au
00
The nuclear industry is chocker block packed with rorters on a par with, if not actually worserer than, the renewables bandits; please, let’s get back to burning our hundreds of years of coal supply.
00
Nuclear reactor power stations are generators same as coal fired power stations with steam power from heating by nuclear reactor instead of coal.
00
Perhaps South Australia should seek advice on grid security from Cuba’s socialist/communist leaders?
https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/total-grid-collapse-strikes-cuba-again
00