Tony Abbott’s victory as Australia dumps green energy target 

Posted: October 16, 2017 by oldbrew in Energy, government, News, Politics
Tags: , , , , ,

Power lines in Victoria, Australia [credit: Wikipedia]

Still trying to square the circle of unreliable, expensive renewables and reliable, affordable electricity supplies. At least one backbencher is starting to get it: “The problem with solar and wind … you’ve got to have them backed up in some way, and that’s either got to be a coal-fired power station, a gas generator or some form of battery.” And making batteries to the scale of power stations is neither practical nor affordable.

The details have not officially been released, but the ABC understands Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull will argue his policy will lower electricity bills more than a Clean Energy Target (CET), while meeting Australia’s Paris climate change commitments, as the GWPF reports.

It is understood Cabinet last night also agreed to force retailers to guarantee a certain amount of so-called dispatchable power that can be switched on and off on demand, to avoid outages.

The plan will be put to the Coalition party room today and is likely to appeal to a group of backbenchers who favour coal-fired power and had opposed a CET from the outset.

The target would have mandated a certain percentage of power be generated from gas and renewable energy, but some backbenchers did not like the idea. Former prime minister Tony Abbott argued a CET was effectively a “tax on coal”.

Liberal backbencher Craig Kelly, who in July said renewable energy was killing people, said he was pleased with Cabinet’s plan for more dispatchable, switch-on/switch-off power. “The problem we’ve had in the past is we have hot days, the demand for electricity spikes, and we haven’t had enough power that you can turn on with a switch to get that,” Mr Kelly told AM.

“The problem with solar and wind, for as wonderful technologies that they are, when there’s no wind you get no electricity generation and as soon as the sun sets, you also get zero electricity generation as well.

“So as good as technologies as they are, you’ve got to have them backed up in some way, and that’s either got to be a coal-fired power station, a gas generator or some form of battery.”

Continued here.

  1. Graeme No.3 says:

    Careful. With the man known as Lord Waffle (and other less polite terms), who is a firm believer in a coming climate disaster as are many of his party, it would pay to wait and read the fine print before expecting any real change in policy.

  2. ivan says:

    They still don’t get it – no matter how you say it unreliables will NEVER be able to supply base load power and you don’t switch it on and off on demand it has to be there ALL the time. In other words coal or nuclear.

  3. BoyfromTottenham says:

    We Aussie electricity consumers wait with bated breath to see how this works out. Is the rest of the (Western) world watching?

  4. oldbrew says:

    Date: 17/10/17 Australian Associated Press

    In question time yesterday, Mr Turnbull said the Government’s new energy plan would be “in stark contrast to the ideology and the idiocy” of the Labor Party’s policy legacy.

    “We will deliver a careful energy plan based on engineering and economics, designed to deliver the triple bottom line of affordability, reliability and meeting our international commitments,” he said.

    Renewables and economics don’t go together too well. Subsidies are expensive and new power stations don’t get built as there’s no, or not enough, financial incentive to play second fiddle to prioritised renewables.

  5. oldbrew says:

    Averaging by Convention – or Not
    by Jennifer Marohasy on October 17, 2017

    FOR some time, weather enthusiasts across Australia have been noticing rapid temperature
    fluctuations at the ‘latest observations’ page at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s website.

    In the comments JM writes:
    ‘We are perhaps going to have to setup our own network of weather stations to get this data.’

  6. AlecM says:

    IPCC physics has been fraudulent since 1976. The 33 K GHE claim is false, based on fake physics buried in the text of R D Cess 1976, backed up in the same year by fake ‘negative convection’ in GISS 2d modelling, admitted by Hansen to an AIP interviewer 25 years later.

    The real physics is defined by self-absorption of atmospheric GHG molecules. The self-absorbed GHGs near the surface turn off about 60% of surface radiant exitance because of the equal IR density of states across the boundary. That transfers each band’s IR emitting surface to be at whatever altitude loses self-absorption, about 20 km for CO2 15 micron. There is no atmospheric heating from surface IR.

    Furthermore, subject to constant tsi, there can be no GHG warming of the surface; the temperature is held constant by negative feedback from the very strong dependence of partial self absorption by 16-23 micron water vapour GHG bands. plus other feedbacks including 15% more green Earth.

    For 40 years we have had a group of scientists connected with various state organisations who have been pushing the GHG warming concept to trace [CO2] variation, when it doesn’t exist. The true PID control system is subtle with new physics including enhanced extinction factor for rain clouds missed by van der Hulst and Hansen in the late 1960.

    This is a new phlogiston: that theory collapsed in 3 years; same for CESS’ claims, which no professional accepts, no matter the insults of those who have ridden the grant gravy train for 40 years and made terrible mistakes. E.g., Goody and Yung’s bidirectional photon diffusion theory failed to understand the Planck 1913 assumed a vacuum and that a pyrgeometer signal, >95% from a theoretical calculation of internal reference S-B emission, is a radiant exitance, not an energy flux.

  7. oldbrew says:

    Turnbull’s plan seems to point in several directions at once. Could be a model for politicians elsewhere 😎

  8. oldbrew says:

    Someone seems to agree with my last comment…

    Date: 17/10/17 Graham Lloyd, The Australian

    Malcolm Turnbull and his energy minister Josh Frydenberg want everyone to believe they have turned the proverbial grit sandwich into a magic pudding on energy.
    . . .
    But there is a conundrum at the heart of the Turnbull government’s plan.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Jiggery-pokery at the BoM…

    The Spectator: More hot days — or “purpose-designed” temperature sensors at play?
    By Jennifer Marohasy

    I don’t believe in conspiracies of silence except when it comes to Harvey Weinstein and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.

    For some time, weather enthusiasts have been noticing rapid temperature fluctuations at the ‘latest observations’ page at the Bureau’s website.

  10. […] Tony Abbott’s victory as Australia dumps green energy target  […]