Over 100,000 People in Green Energy South Australia Now Receive Food Donations

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Power prices in the Australian Renewable Energy Paradise of South Australia have driven 102,000 South Australians to beg for help from food charities, according to a major South Australian Newspaper.

More than 102,000 South Australians seeking food donations, forced to skip meals to pay bills

Liz Walsh, Sheradyn Holderhead, The Advertiser

October 15, 2017 11:31pm

MORE than 102,000 South Australians seek help from food charity Foodbank every month, as parents skip meals for days on end so children can eat and utility bills can be paid, astonishing figures show.

About one quarter — or 26,877 — of those seeking food assistance are children.

The alarming figures have been released today in Foodbank’s 2017 Hunger Report, which also shows that demand from South Australians needing food has increased 21 per cent over the past 12 months, up from 84,847 last year and 56,000 the year before.

Foodbank SA chief executive Greg Pattinson said the high number of those needing assistance was staggering, but not surprising, because more and more SA families were being forced to make the heartbreaking decision to either “heat or eat”.

“We’ve heard it from so many people; the power bills come in and they have to decide: ‘Do we feed the kids today or do we not?’” he said.

“One lady told me that she earned $1000 a month and had just received an electricity bill and simply couldn’t afford to eat for this month — and that’s only 10km south of the CBD.

“Anecdotally, we regularly see that kids are sent off to school and they are OK, but mum and dad don’t eat … one woman told me that she had only Vegemite sandwiches for the week.”

Read more: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/more-than-102000-south-australians-seeking-food-donations-forced-to-skip-meals-to-pay-bills/news-story/e187ab1b7681cc6ea3680b6318336c7c

The full Foodbank report is available here.

This Aussie energy price madness is very quickly becoming a major political issue. Pauline Hansen, the upstart leader of the One Nation Party, has refused to endorse any national policy which leads to higher energy bills.

Pauline Hanson’s Sunrise climate clash with Sarah Hanson-Young

CONTROVERSIAL One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has clashed with a Greens senator on Sunrise about the origins of climate change.

ONE Nation leader Pauline Hanson has had a fiery exchange with a Greens senator on Sunrise, where she claimed climate change is not caused by humans.

Senator Hanson told Senator Sarah Hanson-Young on the breakfast TV show that she was wary of claims made about climate change and its links with pollution. She was also adamant that it does not come from human existence.

“I’m very sceptical of this (climate change) because the science isn’t there, and that’s been proven,” Ms Hanson said on Sunrise.

“Climate is changing, but it’s not from humans Sarah — get this through your head.”

She argued that Australians were sick of high power bills. She also confirmed to Kochie that One Nation would not support the Coalition’s proposed clean energy target.

“People can’t afford it, it’s putting so much pressure on families and businesses,” she said.

‘How can a fish and chip shop afford $14,000 a quarter in electricity? How can these pubs in outback Longreach afford $20,000 electricity a quarter? Wake up.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/morning-shows/pauline-hansons-sunrise-climate-clash-with-sarah-hansonyoung/news-story/390950259fe41a2ab5b7f898e34262fd

My prediction – renewable energy is finished in Australia. Some green pork will continue, for now, but it would be political suicide to allow energy prices to rise any further. People struggling to feed their kids must be wondering how this avoidable catastrophe could ever have been allowed to occur. Despite the usual Australian media subservience to the greens, politicians like Pauline Hanson and former Prime Minister Tony Abbott are getting the message out to voters, about who is responsible for their misery.

Mainstream politicians who put the green religion ahead of constituents struggling to feed their families, like the green leaning socialists currently presiding over South Australia’s misery, will have an increasingly difficult time winning elections in Australia.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 15, 2017 7:54 pm

So reality strikes. Hopefully there will be a revolt against Green politics in Australia that is successful. They need it.

Fred of Greenslopes
Reply to  markl
October 15, 2017 9:50 pm

I wouldn’t bet on it. Australia is full of sheep, not all are the four legged kind.

Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
October 15, 2017 10:56 pm

Wasn’t the green’s clarion call : “it’s for our children’s sake” ?

Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
October 16, 2017 12:17 am


“it’s for our children’s sake”.

“Our” as in not yours……The greenie bunch never seem short of a buck in my experience…..

Tom Judd
Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
October 16, 2017 6:31 am

It’s for the future’s children, you know, the one’s that exist in computer models. It’s not for today’s children. You know, the one’s that exist in reality – which is a difficult concept.

Reply to  markl
October 15, 2017 11:08 pm

We need a One Nation party and a Donald Trump here!

New Zealand the land of green and dream.

Ever hear of our ETS? Well we have had one for about 10 years and who knows where the money is or what it is used for. And the price of housing is steadily climbing.




Reply to  rogerthesurf
October 16, 2017 12:18 am

Just pray that “greens” don’t end up making a majority in your coalition govt, the damage they do elsewhere (Scotland and probably Germany again) is enormous.

Robert from oz
Reply to  rogerthesurf
October 16, 2017 3:18 am

Not sure one nation is our answer , they have the same policy as the greens on fracking yet they insist their policy’s are science based .
And they sold us out on portable power equipment such as chainsaws and whipper snippers (brushcutters) and anything else two stroke because of Co2 emissions .
My hopes now rest with Cory Bernardi who hasn’t sold us out yet but I repeat yet .

Reply to  rogerthesurf
October 16, 2017 1:07 pm


Well I listened closely to Malcolm Roberts’ maiden speech to the (empty) Senate and I believe he got it so right.

Not sure he is in the Senate any more though because of this dual citizenship thing.
However he has hit a note since the left/greens will delve deep to find a chink in the armour of anyone that threatens them.



Reply to  markl
October 16, 2017 4:41 am

Time for the Australian electorate to draw parallels between themselves and China. If China, a far bigger and richer nation, doesn’t have to meet any CO2 obligations, then neither should Australia.

Reply to  markl
October 16, 2017 8:19 am

Did anyone ever think they would see the day that the Australian government is deliberately staving its own citizens in order to prop up a totally discredited, virtue-signalling policy? Now we know why the Aussie government gathered up all firearms a few decades back.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  secryn
October 16, 2017 9:19 am

Now we know why the Aussie government gathered up all firearms a few decades back.

Fer shur the same exact reason that the wacko “troughfeeding” liberals and elitists have been trying for past years n’ years to “gather up all firearms owned by private citizens” here in the US of A …… and would surely have accomplished their dastardly devious un-American feat if not for the 2nd Amendment and the actions of honest and loyal American citizens. And me thinks it will be a “bloodbath” if said “troughfeeding” liberals and elitists ever try to “forcibly” collect said firearms.

NW sage
Reply to  secryn
October 16, 2017 5:44 pm

In a slightly different context don’t Government Policies resulting in starving children constitute war crimes?

October 15, 2017 8:03 pm

Vegemite sandwiches are like eating the sharp out of sharp cheese, without the cheese…

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 8:14 pm

I’m pretty sure it’s the same as Marmite…never had Vegemite…

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 8:44 pm

Brewer’s yeast extract, similar to Marmite, but doesn’t have that ‘burnt’ flavour of Marmite, so it’s nicer.
That’s just my `opinion.’ FWIW

Tom Halla
Reply to  sophocles
October 15, 2017 8:57 pm

I think I tried Vegemite once at a party some 35 or so years ago, and thought it was something of an acquired taste.Not, however, the sort of macho nonsense as serving Halapeno pepper based items.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 9:58 pm

Neither one sounds like something you should willingly put in your mouth.

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 10:37 pm

Vegemite is a near substitute for Marmite. UK Marmite is sold in Australia as “Our Mate” as the original trade name was on-sold and isn’t comparable. None of it compares to the original WWII ration, later NHS version, brown lettering on a cardboard pot. No kidding … Vegemite had to be smuggled into the USA. The odd pot went in the diplomatic bag apparently. Bovril (beef extract) now sold as “suitable for vegetarians” so I guess that’s been messed with? Coca-Cola Classic 1886 ? I think there is one ingredient missing …

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 10:42 pm

I’m pretty sure it’s the same as Marmite…never had Vegemite….

Only someone who has never tasted Vegemite could say that. Thanks for sharing your admittedly ignorant opinion.

It’s like saying soya mince is the same as ground beef ( but I’ve never tasted soya ).

Tom Halla
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 15, 2017 8:58 pm

Getting airheaded, and in need of an edit function on what I just posted. Habanero peppers.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 15, 2017 9:38 pm

Are you sure it is not vitameatavegamin?

Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 15, 2017 10:52 pm

Yes Tom, I was going to point out that Jalapeno is a medium hot chilli, about 5.5 / 10 on the Scoville scale.It’s mild enough to sprinkle, finely chopped, on a salad.

Habaneros are weapons grade and need to be carefully dosed. Actually they have rather an odd flavour which I don’t like that much.

BTW when I say weapons grade, I mean that literally: they are used in making what is euphemistically called “pepper spray” that leftwing extremists were squirting in the eyes and faces of those they do not agree with in Charlottesville and Berkeley.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Greg
October 16, 2017 7:04 am

Chile japones (bird chiles) are about the hottest usable in food, IMHO. Habaneros are mostly used in drinking games.

lemiere jacques
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 15, 2017 11:35 pm

marmite denier

James Fosser
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 16, 2017 1:32 pm

Same colour but that is all.Are you sure you are Australian?

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 15, 2017 9:35 pm

Great stuff, and my go-to food source when not feeling well. Superb on toast.

Reply to  Graeme#4
October 15, 2017 11:01 pm

If you want something simpler than a Dagwood, try a Danish blue cheese and vegemite sandwich ….. a magical combination!

October 15, 2017 8:09 pm

It’s a damn shame that innocent people have to pay because their leaders are clueless.

South Australia may be a “tipping point” for renewables. They have had nothing but trouble since the leaders took the country in the Alarmist direction. SA will give the rest of us a good idea of what *not* to do regarding energy production.

Reply to  TA
October 15, 2017 8:28 pm

They don’t call SA “the worlds unreliables crash test dummy” for nothing – run for far too many years by J. Weatherdill!!

Hey, I like Vegemite stop dragging its name down in the Climate muck.

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia
Reply to  ColA
October 16, 2017 4:52 am

Buying bread from a man in Brussels
He was six-foot-four and full of muscles
I said, “Do you speak-a my language?”
He just smiled and gave me a Vegemite sandwich
And he said

I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can’t you hear, can’t you hear the thunder?
You better run, you better take cover

Reply to  TA
October 15, 2017 9:02 pm

Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria have themselves in equally silly positions where it does not matter what they do they can not get generation costs down. The bright sparks in those State governments setup a situation where the utility companies were guaranteed a profit for expenditure on the network and now wondering why those companies spent massive amounts on a “Gold Plated network” which has lead to a massive price increase to consumers.

Now they are all ducking for cover trying to blame everyone else, and the media is so corrupt that even when they are given the facts by the ACCC it diverts blame. The ABC is the only media outlet I have seen correctly report the issue

Two-thirds of the grid operators’ income comes from earnings guaranteed by the regulator linked to the value of their networks.

That earnings guarantee was signed off by the State Governments, blind Freddy would have known that given an absolute guarantee of return they would over-invest .. profit with no risk.

M Seward
Reply to  LdB
October 15, 2017 10:12 pm

Considering it was the collapse of hight tension line towers that precipitated the big shutdown in SA, compounded by the useless as tits on a bull wind farms, maybe there is a good argument for ‘gold plating’ the grid components. Just imagine hue and cry if the towers owned by private operators started falling over in extreme winds…

So much for the ABC’s reporting.

Reply to  LdB
October 15, 2017 11:12 pm

Whoa, that’s straight out of Atlas Shrugged, (which I read more than a third of a century ago). The most profitable railroad will be the one that run no trains.

Robert from oz
Reply to  LdB
October 16, 2017 3:23 am

South Australia get worried when winds get high into double figures , not sure how those towers are built but in Victoriastan that’s just a breeze .

Reply to  LdB
October 16, 2017 3:25 am

Actually the SA blackout was caused by the wind generators shutting down prematurely, due to too-low wind speed settings. The additional power load then transferred to the Victoria interconnector, which couldn’t handle the additional load and also shut down. The high tension towers fell down AFTER the above events occurred, not before. The state’s Premier of course blames the powerline tower failures, not the wind generators, and this fallacy is repeated by the CAGW folks. But this is totally wrong if you look at the time sequence of events.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
October 16, 2017 4:29 pm

Griff, read comment “Graeme#4 October 16, 2017 at 3:25 am”, and become informed about the incident in SA.

Reply to  TA
October 15, 2017 9:23 pm

They managed to increase power prices so much that a plastic recycling company could no longer afford to do business and closed. Strangely the report on “their” ABC doesn’t see to see the irony of indicating that SA may have to ship their empty plastic bottles overseas to be recycled.


Patrick MJD
Reply to  OldGreyGuy
October 16, 2017 2:21 am

So too car making.

Reply to  TA
October 16, 2017 2:02 am

“It’s a damn shame that innocent people have to pay because their leaders are clueless.”

Could that be a definition of Socialism?

Reply to  graphicconception
October 16, 2017 6:46 am

“My prediction – renewable energy is finished in Australia”.

Oh that you could be correct. However I fear that logic, democracy and lives do not matter to those pulling the levers, otherwise, this would have been stopped in its tracks at its inception. You don’t need to be Nostradamus to have foreseen the bleeding obvious now occurring.

October 15, 2017 8:11 pm

OMG… forcing people to live on Vegemite sandwiches? Now they’ve gone too far… 😉

Tom Halla
October 15, 2017 8:22 pm

The economic results of green policies should lead to their rejection, but it has not happened yet. With 100K people in energy poverty out of only 1.7 million, it should be a major scandal, but the green blob is shameless.

Reply to  Tom Halla
October 15, 2017 9:28 pm

Tom, the result of green energy policies here in the u.s. appear to be quite good on the whole. i think we’re learning the same lessons that we learned under reagan, that energy diversification is good for prices overall. September saw an employment rate that is as low as it has been since bush took office in 2001! And yet, the inflation rate is a comfy 2.2%, so the economy still has plenty of room to grow. This in large part, one would think, due to the diversification of energy. (natural gas, as well as renewables taking pressure off the more traditional markets) It would be nice to see some technical posts on the economics involved in green energy here a wuwt. Just how green energy is actually making things worse. Because on the whole it appears that we’re much better off economically. (somebody out there let me know where i’m going wrong here as i’d really like to know, thanx)…

Reply to  afonzarelli
October 15, 2017 9:56 pm

There is not a shred of evidence that “energy diversification” has anything to do with the current economic improvement in the U.S. In fact the reverse is happening. The current administration and the majority party in Congress is rejecting “green energy” and its subsidies and the restrictive “green regulations” put forth by the EPA under the previous administration. The systematic and rapid dismantling of the burdensome regulations of the previous administration is increasing the confidence of businesses that America’s awesome economic engine can steam forward, trusting that the era of ridiculous regulations is waning. At least for the next three years.

Reply to  afonzarelli
October 15, 2017 11:44 pm

(natural gas, as well as renewables taking pressure off the more traditional markets)

How, exactly, does forcing high cost renewables into the market take pressure off of traditional markets?

If I told you that from now on, every fifth time you bought a hamburger for $5, you had to buy a faux hamburger for $20 instead…. would you smile and say thanks for diversifying the hamburger market and taking the pressure off of traditional beef producers?

Tom Halla
Reply to  afonzarelli
October 16, 2017 6:56 am

Energy costs in the US are due to fracking/horizontal drilling, developments vehemently opposed by the green blob.”Gasland”, anyone? Or New York Gov Andrew Cuomo?
The goals of the green blob are better expressed in Obama’s meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board in 2008, where he said that electric prices will “necessarily skyrocket”. Remember the mockery by the left of Sarah Palin and “Drill baby, Drill”?
We have something of a pause, and need to metaphorically bury green energy policies in a crossroads, washed in holy water, with a stake in it’s heart.

Reply to  afonzarelli
October 16, 2017 11:14 am

Boy, you guys really have your heads up your backsides here. (i was hoping for some intelligent discussion) If we compare energy prices now as compared to those a decade ago, then energy is cheap. The unemployment rate here in the states is significantly lower than ten years ago. And yet the inflation rate is significantly lower as well. If you add more to supply of energy anywhere, it will bring prices down. (not only energy prices, but the cost of doing business, that is inflation, as well) This is particularly important when world wide demand is up. The difference between reagan and carter was the diversification of sources of energy thus the inflation rate was lower. So also, the difference between trump and bush is that we have more sources of energy. Sure, you’re going to get “green” areas where prices will be higher on average. But those areas are then a gain for other areas because they use less of the traditional sources. Furthermore, “green” areas are also the benefactors of the lower prices overall. (less inflation, cheaper gasoline, etc) To overcome y’alls gross ignorance, you might want to read up on the second oil shock under carter to see just how much energy prices affect the inflation rate…

Bob Burban
Reply to  afonzarelli
October 16, 2017 1:24 pm

My latest electricity bill in Los Angeles (California) jumped 50% over a period of 2 months … and I sincerely wish a pox on the Gang Green.

Reply to  afonzarelli
October 16, 2017 10:44 pm

(i was hoping for some intelligent discussion)

So were we.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Tom Halla
October 16, 2017 2:18 am

South Australians are…special. They keep voting for economic destruction and energy poverty.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
October 16, 2017 6:15 am

They can afford to. SA is a mendicant state that is kept afloat by taking money from the other states and arranging for the federal govt to keep setting up defence services in the most out-of-the-way state, such as long-range surveillance aircraft close to Antartica where they will be really useful. As long as everybody else is paying for them, they can afford to go “green”.

John F. Hultquist
October 15, 2017 9:15 pm

‘How can a fish and chip shop afford $14,000 a quarter in electricity? How can these pubs in outback Longreach afford $20,000 electricity a quarter?

Well, I can afford to visit a fish and chip shop or a pub — but rarely do.
When I was very young, my mother (& father) taught the kids to cook.
We learned to cook Oatmeal, then bread, noodles, and a concoction called Spanish rice —
a bit of ground meat, tomatoes, and rice. Yum!
Now we grow things and give about 60% away. Mostly to individuals but sometimes to the local food-bank.

Point is, that if fast-food shops/pubs depended on us, they would not exist.

I’ll guess the policies of the government are destroying the economic structure of the society, including wages, and jobs — while raising costs.
Destroying a society’s wealth is unsustainable.
Incentivize innovation and economic production and people will work and have food.
SA is good at doing the opposite.
Go figure.

Reply to  John F. Hultquist
October 16, 2017 1:28 am

Funny fact about Spanish rice, in Spain it is called Cuban rice.

Les Francis
Reply to  John F. Hultquist
October 16, 2017 4:04 am

How about a disability pensioner in Victoria with a three month winter electricity account for $2,400.00?

Needed to keep her heating going 24/7 over winter..

No way to pay this bill. so called charity for assistance with the bill. Charity could only supply a couple of hundred towards that amount.

Electricity billing company was not sympathetic to her plight. In fact one overseas call centre representative told her that she should have turned the heating off and worn a coat if the power bill was too high.

Her electricity will be cut off shortly.
Recent Australian statistics state that over 8600 households a month are having power utilities disconnected due to unaffordable accounts.

Reply to  Les Francis
October 16, 2017 5:49 am

Very similar issues in Eastern Europe

Russia funds “green” groups to help ban fossil fuel energy
Governments subsidize the looters building Quixotic energy plans
Old man winter comes
Pensioners in Eastern Europe pay 60%+ of their money to Russia for fossil fuels
Pensioners freeze or starve

Government claims success

Rinse and repeat.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Les Francis
October 16, 2017 9:43 am

Les @4:04,
In the USA, there are “disconnection policies” that vary by state and even within states. The general idea is to protect vulnerable people. These regulations often include provisions for resolving the issues.
Some of the wording can be found here for Washington State:
WA disconnection policy

Main link: https://liheapch.acf.hhs.gov/Disconnect

Our local utility has an opt-in plan whereby payers can have an additional charge added to the bill (increments of $3/month). This accumulated pot of money is disbursed to local charities to which customers can apply for assistance. Thus, the utility does not need to get involved in evaluating the circumstances.
The charities have other contacts to help a person. That might involve improving the house’s insulation or replacing an inefficient furnace, and much more. Food can be provided, as necessary.

A neighbor is in his mid-90s. He lives alone in a large house on an acreage once used as a dairy. Poor decisions years ago has put this person in a situation, such that, without lots of public and private assistance he would have to sell the house and land and downsize.
He should do that. Such would remove the burden he now causes and allow what now goes to him, to go to someone else.

These sorts of situations are all different. We (society) do not handle them well.

Hokey Schtick
October 15, 2017 9:36 pm

At this rate, the last person to leave South Australia won’t have to turn the lights out.

October 15, 2017 9:44 pm

The sad part is the Green eco fascist don;t care about the hardship they bring as long as the save the planet from CO2 and lines their pockets. EVIL BASTA#DS ONE AND ALL!!!!

October 15, 2017 10:22 pm

Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
“Mainstream politicians who put the green religion ahead of constituents struggling to feed their families, like the green leaning socialists currently presiding over South Australia’s misery, will have an increasingly difficult time winning elections in Australia.”

AUSTRALIA’S unreliable-energy crisis – entirely man-made, by climate theory-obsessed politicians from both sides of the aisle and a compliant mainstream media.

WATCH the rise of the true conservative parties at the next election – Pauline Hanson’s “One Nation” and especially, Cory Bernardi’s “Australian Conservatives”.

October 15, 2017 11:03 pm

You have to understand the huge amount of CO2 Australia, and SA in particular, are saving from getting into atmosphere of the planet. Work it out it is truly huge. They will save the planet despite all the naysayers one day soon. Till then they have imaginary battery backed-up cloudy solar powered days and becalmed windmills to rely on.
Besides we wouldn’t want all those plants turning the CO2 into useful sustainable stuff now would we?

October 15, 2017 11:13 pm

There is a saying in early USA democracy by Thomas Jefferson….”The government you elect is the government you deserve.” Not that Oz or SA deserves this but how was it that Oz and more specifically SA, went so far off the rails to elect such a self destructive gov’t as to actually destroy part of their base load generation and try and adopt renewables to replace existing base load electricity that was already producing at a reasonable price?

Yes, I know it is the CAGW religion, but surely the majority did not become Gaia worshippers all at once. What changed in SA that allowed such a radical departure from its recent past? I have heard a lot about the technical problem and proposed solutions that won’t work economically, but something very radical must have happened to such a small population to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As in blow up a functioning coal fired base load generation asset before it had been replaced with something similar.

Was it a foreign Gov’t that influenced the elections so they could make off with the coal and nat gas? Was it a change in electoral demographics of some kind that radically changed voting patterns the last 10 years? Or is it just some form of demagoguery that somehow took over and hoodwinked everyone at once to follow them over the cliff. The majority didn’t have to vote for this green eco diatribe that has caused a lot of hardship on the average citizen. Other jurisdictions should pay close attention to what happened/happens in SA and OZ, since this could happen anywhere.

Reply to  Earthling2
October 16, 2017 3:36 am

Today’s Aust. Newspoll might provide a clue. 63% of Australians want to continue renewable subsidies, but 58% say they don’t want to pay anything towards the subsidies. This was a poll across the whole of Aust., not just SA. Clueless…

Reply to  Graeme#4
October 16, 2017 8:56 am

10 Print “Voters want lower taxes and more services.”
20 Print “Realistic politicians who tell them it doesn’t work that way, don’t get elected.”
30 Print “Unrealistic politicians who get elected deficit spend to give voters what they want.”
40 Print “Debt catches up and forces the raising of taxes and/or the cutting of services.”
50 Print “Newly realistic politicians get voted out next election.”
60 Goto 10

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Graeme#4
October 16, 2017 4:26 pm

Greece, Italy, Spain?

October 15, 2017 11:16 pm

Consider that 102,000 people who are faced with an eat or heat choice represent slightly over 6% of the population of South Australia. I thought about applying this ratio to my state, California, but quickly found that the percentage of California residents who already receive public assistance is considerably more than 6% and growing.

Patrick MJD
October 15, 2017 11:21 pm

“Despite the usual Australian media subservience to the greens, politicians like Pauline Hanson and former Prime Minister Tony Abbott are getting the message out to voters, about who is responsible for their misery.”

It’s a bit late for that IMO.

October 15, 2017 11:51 pm

In Australia the rich get richer and the poor increase. Besides being foolish nonsense carbon taxes are
a way to keep the poor poor and hollow out the middle class . Governments have always appreciated
a serf class .

Len Jay
October 15, 2017 11:51 pm

Irony of ironies. The Australian political party most opposed to the increase of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere call themselves the Greens. It is becoming increasingly obvious that increasing atmospheric CO2 is actually greening the planet, a phenomenon which should cause the Green Party immense pleasure, but instead they are fighting it tooth and nail. The party founder was instrumental in preventing forest logging and hydro dams in Tasmania. His name is Bob Brown so perhaps the Green Party should really have been named after him to reflect the real effects on the earth’s vegetation the party’s policies would have.

Cold in Wisconsin
October 16, 2017 12:28 am

Perhaps Mr. Brown could have a Brown Shirt Party like the National Socialists!

Nigel S
October 16, 2017 12:41 am

The UK Foodbanks have a left of centre political outlook. It’s interesting to see another side from Australia.


Reply to  Nigel S
October 16, 2017 1:25 am

They’ve been praised by arch conservative Rees-Mogg. And only necessary because of the actions/policy of a rightist govt. so I don’t see how you can say that.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 9:07 am

Rule 1: Leftist policy never causes problems.
Rule 2: When a Leftist policy causes a problem, blame Rightist policy and see Rule 1.

Nigel S
Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 1:34 pm

They are a good idea but used for left of centre propaganda as this attempt to disrupt a meeting addressed by JRM shows and his hardly ‘arch conservative response.


Reply to  Griff
October 19, 2017 3:48 pm

Ah, “there are no enemies on the Left”, isn’t that right Skanky?
And if you believe that any Tory government since the political assassination of Margaret Thatcher has been Right-wing, then you totally confirm my assertion that you are a solid, card-carrying Lefty, even Cameron admitted that he was a “Progressive” AKA Soft Socialist.

And Rees-Mogg didn’t praise the food banks as such, you opprobrious little fibber. He praised the charity and generosity of the members of the public who contributed to them. You just can’t help lying about anything and everything you post about, can you?

Now go and apologise to Dr. Crockford.

Nigel S
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 16, 2017 3:12 am

Yes, harder to ignore the collateral damage when it’s in your backyard even if it doesn’t fit the agenda.

October 16, 2017 1:26 am

Renewable energy is not the main or only reason for high Australian power prices.

And while power prices are high, it pushes more people to renewable energy.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 6:25 am

SA had reliable power from a coal-fired power station that delivered power 24/7. The state govt. then shut it down, refusing to extend its life for a few million $, and then dynamited it to make sure it never re-started. Now they are continually faced with power shortages and have to rely on other states to supply them power at inflated prices. And they are installing dirty polluting diesel generators as backups, along with an expensive tiny battery bank that costs the earth but won’t achieve anything. If you wrote a movie script using this story, nobody would believe it, as it’s impossible for anybody to be that stupid. But then, this is SA…

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 9:18 am

A red pen is still a red pin, Griff, no matter how many times you say it’s blue.

And if renewable energy is so wonderful, why must it be pushed on people?

Reply to  drednicolson
October 16, 2017 10:40 am

Agreed. If it’s wonderful, a panecea, the ultimate in ways of making energy, why then does it require tax breaks, ramrodding installations where there are not enough people to protest, lapping up billions in renewable energy contracts that are mandatory, lies by the industry about costs and production, etc? If it’s great, it would sell itself. It doesn’t. Therefore….

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 12:14 pm

You effin idiot Griff. You got vegimite for brain. I’ve never read anything more stupid than your comment in 70yrs.

Reply to  Stephen Richards
October 16, 2017 5:51 pm

In this case, I believe Griff is mostly correct – it depends on whether you take his comment as Australia-wide or only SA. The ACCC today released a report that in part backs up what Griff is saying, i.e. for Australia as a whole, green policies have only caused 16% of the cost increases. Some of Australia’s power cost increases have been due to other causes, such as network “gold-plating” during Labor’s years in government, supporting their electrical union mates. However, for SA, Griff is wrong, as renewables here were responsible for 45% of their cost increase.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 5:58 pm

Griff is again off in his land of substance created make-believe.

What substance did you use this time, griff, because it sure is WACKY stuff !!

Robert from oz
October 16, 2017 3:35 am

I do love south Australia as a place to visit but the towns struggling for survival and those abandoned along with numerous infrastructure at the hands of governments over the years makes me think there is something in the water in this state .

Sceptical lefty
October 16, 2017 3:38 am

If you read the Report and note the number of meals served in each State, then divide that by the population of each State (according to the 2016 Census), it would appear that Tasmania and Queensland are in substantially worse positions, while Western Australia is marginally worse. South Australia appears to be somewhat worse off than the Northern Territory, New South Wales and Victoria.

My analysis is pretty crude, I don’t doubt that S.A.’s position is unenviable (by Western standards) and it’s highly likely that the green myopia of its government has contributed to the State’s woes, but let’s be reasonable about comparisons here. It seems that a case could be made for more urgent investigation of the situations in the two worst States. At least, a case could be made for better statistical analysis.

It is hardly surprising that the Adelaide (the State capital) ‘Advertiser’ would concentrate on local issues in isolation from the bigger picture. Parochial news outlets tend to have parochial attitudes.

Reply to  Sceptical lefty
October 16, 2017 4:50 am

if your anywhere outside cities or major rural towns
there is NO foodbank to help out thats why the numbers arent as high as they could be!
i was bitching re 250bill 1/3 of which is service supply charges! for 3mths
mate also old age pensioner just got a 750$ bill for 3mths
so much for rev cycle aircon being efficient
i didnt spend that much on 2 loads of redgum for the fire

and the gold plated lines? in Vic we have THE oldest daggiest pine poles all through the area,looking at the lean on many is distracting as you drive

Don B
October 16, 2017 3:45 am

Australian blogger Jo Nova has done a wonderful job of pointing out the craziness going on in South Australia.


Sandy In Limousin
October 16, 2017 3:48 am

This kind of statistic bothers me. My first reaction is how many of that 102,000 actually are so poor as to need free or low cost food? How stringent are the checks? Whilst not disputing there are a lot of very poor people there are an awful lot of others prepared to take advantage of generosity.

High energy costs are very bad for the economy, having lived through the global recessions caused by Arab Oil Embargoes and restrictions it’s pretty obvious that the route of expensive “renewable” energy will only lead to hardship.

Reply to  Sandy In Limousin
October 16, 2017 10:46 am

If the stats are gathered like they are in the USA, the surveys quoted ask things like “Were you afraid you would run out of food any time this month?” and similar hypothetical questions. There’s no actual checking on the absence of food in a home. American food banks claim 20% of American children live in “food uncertainty” meaning a parent answered the question asked as “Yes”. Whether or not they ran out of food is not asked.

Also, in the USA, children often eat all three meals AT SCHOOL. Some schools in Wyoming added breakfast to the lunches and dinners now. Many states already had these in place. Plus weekend backpacks are handed out so the children have food over the weekend. If there is hunger in America, it’s not from the absence of food.

James Fosser
Reply to  Sheri
October 16, 2017 1:46 pm

There is a place near where I live that hands out subsidised food once a week to supposedly needy families.As I drive past I am constantly amazed at the plethora of SUVs and other expensive cars all turning up. I stopped twice to watch and people were coming out with trolley loads of food and filling up the backs of these vehicles until they could not cram in any more. I have never sighted an old car and never saw any children as evidence of family.

October 16, 2017 4:28 am

A survey of the reasons for high price of energy in Australia:

“Study finds rising gas prices to blame for electricity bill hike, not renewable energy costs”

“In recent years, much of the increase in prices has been attributed to the need to invest in the network component because of previous underinvestment in maintaining the network or to increase capacity. Also important has been the impact of policies to address environmental issues.”

A number of different reasons given here:

Robert from oz
Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 5:04 am

As someone who has panels on the roof subsidised by the people who can least afford it and also pay for my feed in tariff I know how much this impost is hurting those that can least afford their ever increasing bills .
So the study says it’s gas wot dunnit eh, just wondering what we had before gas, windmills and solar ? Oh yeah that would have been coal ,good old coal providing cheap affordable energy till some halfwit invented global cooling the decided that it was warming instead .
And of course they’re always right aren’t they , you apologised to that lovely Susan lady yet ?

Reply to  Robert from oz
October 16, 2017 8:04 am

Yes Robert it’s a case of feast or famine- http://anero.id/energy/wind-energy/2017/october
with thermal generators expected to provide the insurance without any premiums, but rather perversely pay the insured for the privilege. The one question that never gets asked in these cookups is how much of that spiralling network cost rise is down to voltage and frequency control infrastructure to ameliorate the plethora of disparate, unreliable generators being tacked on everywhere? Seek and ye shall not find.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Robert from oz
October 16, 2017 4:22 pm

“Robert from oz October 16, 2017 at 5:04 am”

I am not one of the people in Aus that can least afford to pay for energy, I can’t wait to see my next bill, but I do pay for subsidies and feed-in tariffs that you, and others, enjoy.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 6:06 am

Griff you don’t live in Australia so how about you butt out. The reason for the price rises have been given by the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) a group whose only responsibility is to the consumer. You left green idiots and bleeding hearts along with the corrupt media trying to be to protect there advertising customers are completely full of lies pushing your own agenda.

If you want to comment at least bother to read the report

The answers have been clearly given by an unbiased party with powers to investigate unlike all the crazy comments from parties with agendas

You can see the increases in Figure 2.2, Changes in average residential customer bill from 2007–08 to 2015–16

1.) 60% of the price rises was because the utilities spent money hand over fist in network upgrades and improvements because they were guaranteed a return under the rules of the regulation. You may broadly call it the utilities having you snout in the trough, Rorting the system or corruption depending on your view.

2.) 25% of the price rise was increase in retail margins the regulator thinks they will be able to claw that down.

3.) 20% of the price rise was cause by subsidies (7%) and feed in pricing (13%) for renewables

The numbers aren’t open to debate if the ACCC lied they can be taken to the Crime and Corruption Committee. Now at the moment the Politicians and the Media are trying to protect the 4 main suppliers. The problem is the Network Rort is locked in and it now doesn’t matter what source you power the grid from it will cost you. The scary part those 4 big power generators and retailers are also heavily involved in renewable energy so it is scary what they have been rorting there.

What I would suggest for private individuals who are in the Australian States effected is the write to the CCC (Crime and Corruption Committee) in your State and ask them to investigate. I have no confidence any government or media will be interested in actions against those big parties but the CCC acts outside political control.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
October 16, 2017 4:18 pm

+10. Griff has no idea what he is talking about with regards to energy in Australia. Consumers have been royally screwed in Aus.

Reply to  LdB
October 16, 2017 6:09 pm

Price hikes may not be caused 100% by renewable. per say,

But they are most certainly caused almost exclusively by the far-left Anti-CO2 agenda

Reply to  LdB
October 19, 2017 3:51 pm

Patrick, Griff has no idea what he is talking about – period.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 9:22 am

Blaming the egg for the chicken, Griff.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 9:32 am

Yeah, Griff, part of MY electric bill is provided by gas-generated power.

My bill hasn’t gone up. It has dropped.

So why is my electric bill lower, when the bill for those people are drastically higher?

Your smug little argument does not bear close scrutiny. In my view, it’s just plain fraud handed off to people who have no alternative.

Reply to  Griff
October 16, 2017 10:48 am

Would the increase in gas costs be due the backup plants? Two power plants, twice the cost.

Reply to  Sheri
October 16, 2017 6:02 pm

Part of the gas cost problem Sheri is that, on the eastern side of Australia, the state governments never locked in a fixed percentage of gas to be supplied for domestic use, as distinct from Western Australia who locked in 15%. This allows the eastern gas producers to export as much gas as they want to, then bargain with the electricity folks by using spot prices, effectively meaning that the gas producers can charge more for their gas at times when the electricity folks urgently need the gas when the renewables are not supplying energy. So up goes the price of electricity on the grid-connected eastern side, compared to the isolated western side who have fixed-price agreements with their gas producers. It’s a real mess in the east, and the governments there have only got themselves to blame for this.

Reply to  Sheri
October 16, 2017 9:47 pm

Ahhh…that explains some of the high electricity prices Graeme. When they purposely shuttered some of the coal generating assets, and allowed massive LNG exports from eastern Oz, then base load supply is already a premium priced product because the LNG exports caused high domestic pricing for nat gas. And on standby for back up spinning reserve for the unreliable renewables. Now it starts to make sense, except why wasn’t there a national strategy in place that saw all States being equally protected with an Oz first policy of stable electricity prices from an abundant transition fuel like nat gas? I guess it just boils down to really, really bad governance. Kick the bums out…

Reply to  Sheri
October 18, 2017 12:40 am

Correct and they are all getting off the hook because they just say renewables and the media goes into a frenzy.

October 16, 2017 4:52 am

The government of Ontario looks at what Australia has wrought with reverence and awe.

Peta of Newark
October 16, 2017 6:00 am

Little voice from the back (who you kidding, the cry goes up) but what happened to Skepticism today here?

Don’t we know not to confuses cause and effect – are we *really* sure high energy prices are having the supposed effect.
It gets worse, as grown up people who ‘know’ what the Victorians learned in England when it comes to charity.
It creates its own demand. You start handing out free anything and before you know, there’s a queue round the block. At least Mr trump knows that – it’s why he knocked Paris on the head.

I was intrigued by the mention of Fish & Chip shops, certainly in the UK, going to the chippie is One Very Expensive Way of eating.

So, armed with the UK (WW2) wartime ration book, I went shopping to Tesco.
And we do remember what ‘they’ said – Folks were never healthier than during the war.

I put together a week’s ration for the price of just over £8, obviously UK money as of now.

Take that list one of the discount grocers and you’ll get away with £6 or less.

Going to the chip shop, just once, sets you back nearly £6. A Doner Kebab is over a fiver

Plenty people have already made judgements, no more from me.

2 wonderments to ponder though.
At an industrial estate (in Carlisle where I used to live) that seemed to specialise in the repair of trucks, tractors, cars & vans, heavy plant etc.
Obviously lots of young men, doing heavy grease laden dirty work in unheated workshops and out-of-doors.
There was/is a cafe in the centre of that estate and THE most popular lunchtime ‘dish’ was a polystyrene tray loaded with liver & bacon, in gravy topped off with fries.
I ask, would those young men be seen dead eating that stuff in the company of their girlfriends?

Next wonderation, Gout.
The most (commonly recorded) ancient disease afflicting human-kind and especially the rich, the elite and the well-to-do. Caused, as we all know, by a Rich Diet.

Yet for all the super science & medicine and the life extending remedies we have theses days, the *ONLY* connection that can be found between Gout and diet, is the consumption of offal.
Livers, kidneys and blood (as famous in the English Black Pudding) or offal generally in the Scottish haggis. So, what gives?

I’ll leave that one to you……..

Reply to  Peta of Newark
October 16, 2017 10:47 am

Well, a gout attack is triggered by the buildup and crystalizing of uric acid in a joint, usually in the extremities (where circulatory pressure is weakest). Its a waste product of digestion and is usually dissolved in the blood then filtered out through the kidneys. So for gout to occur, there must be too much uric acid being produced for the blood to dissolve, and/or a problem with the kidneys.

So some possible explanations for the discrepancy are,
a) With regular access to food and relative protection from danger, they lived long enough to get it.
b) They enjoyed indulgent and largely sedentary lifestyles. (ie. they got fat)
c) They married almost exclusively within their own class–and for royals, even within their own extended families–greatly increasing the risk of genetic defects, like kidney disease.
d) With little to no knowledge of pain-relieving drugs, a common “treatment” for gout would have been to drink oneself senseless, providing relief but exacerbating the existing problem. (Alcohol, especially beer, promotes uric acid production.)

Reply to  drednicolson
October 16, 2017 10:51 am

Now you’re just being rational and scientific!

October 16, 2017 6:37 am

That is the whole point of the greenist religion, drive people into total dependence on government. Just listen to them, they never hide it and are in fact quite proud of it.

October 16, 2017 9:01 am

Heat or eat? When did Jimmy Carter get elected president of SA?

October 16, 2017 9:18 am

“One lady told me that she earned $1000 a month and had just received an electricity bill and simply couldn’t afford to eat for this month ” – commenter above.

Here’s my question: when is someone going to sue the pants off the elected idiots and their pet project directors? They lied, didn’t they? Sue them. Class action suits are a legitimate deal.

I’m on fixed income. I have a budget to follow and I stick to it like glue. I have yet to have to visit a food pantry for any purpose other than making donations. In my area, there’s a holiday collecting point and I take stuff to it. I made a pot of white bean (cannellini) soup yesterday. I figure the cost of that was about $2.75USD and will get at least eight servings out of it. Made cornbread to go with it on the side. Is the cost of food so egregious that people can’t afford to buy the basic ingredients to make a pot of beans? Or is the real problem that they have lost the ability to cook from scratch?

And why would anyone settle for crappy stuff when you can make good healthy meals from basic ingredients? That doesn’t make any sense.

Just trying to understand this problem – is it just Aussies, or is it more common?

My current electric bill is lower than it was the month of August. We have those idiot renewable sources up here just yet, and we’d better not get them. There are companies that have wind turbines on their premises, perhaps to supplement the local power company, but I seldom see them moving. Perhaps the expense of installing them simply wasn’t worth it.

Reply to  Sara
October 16, 2017 10:59 am

My electric was higher than August, but only because I forgot to pay it in September and they combined the two months!

Kind of O/T, but in the US, this problem arose with propane a few years back. Propane is delivered by the owner of your tank and unless it’s you who owns the tank (not that common), you buy from the tank owner. Many required their customers to allow delivery of propane whenever it was convenient to the dealer, thus allowing delivery of very expensive fuel without actually tell the customer (which is why I don’t allow that). Propane hit $5 a gallon in places, possibly more. People on social security were getting bills of over $2000 for a tank fill. Propane prices are unregulated. However, there were a couple of lawsuits, some talk of regulating, etc, and things straightened out. Free market did work to resolve the problem. Had a certain percentage of energy been mandated to come from propane, as is the case with renewables in many places, the cost could have stayed high for years.

Reply to  Sara
October 16, 2017 1:12 pm

Part of the education system here in the UK used to teach ‘Domestic Science’ [at my school (late 1960s) – possibly a different name at others] – which certainly included basic cooking.
However, only one young man in my year took DS – with most of the girls.
Such behaviour today would simply not be tolerated – if the subject is taught at al; such is the power of the ranking that a subject intended to improve a person’s future life [like cooking several basics from scratch] is dropped in favour of a subject for examination [and certificate!].
I made a soup yesterday, too – butter bean and kale. About three litres [US Quarts ~] and I reckon about three pounds. And I am no great cook – reasonably competent in some areas, that’s all.

So – with DS off the menu at school – no, it is NOT just Aussies.


Reply to  Auto
October 16, 2017 2:07 pm

It was called ‘domestic science’ here in the US, too, and both sewing and cooking were taught in 7th and 8th grades. They were offered as options in high school, but I didn’t take them. I was always the first one home at the end of the day, so I would call my mother at work and ask her what to start for supper, so that it was ready by the time people got home. Meals from leftovers were a great way to stretch a budget and learn how to cook with nearly nothing.
There are online so many foodie websites, a lot of which have simple recipes, that I can’t imagine anyone not taking advantage of them, or not buying basic ingredients for future use. It just makes sense. I live in the suburbs in a county that does not restrict gardening which means farmers markets everywhere spring through fall, and many people grow their own stuff for canning and freezing if they have the yard space. It takes maybe a 20 x 20 foot space to have a veggie garden, or even just the raised beds, covered to keep the squirrels out.
I understand the burden that a bad idea places on people on fixed income, but when they say they’re going hungry because of their utility bills, then there is something extremely wrong in this picture, and it isn’t about having a garden or clever shopping methods at the root of it.

The Reverend Badger
Reply to  Auto
October 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Changes noted (UK):
1970’s – Undergraduates were generally poor, made their own beer/wine, cooked for themselves, relatively rarely had expensive takeaways. Undergraduates were also the creme-de-la-creme of the educational system . They were intelligent and resourceful and could turn their hand to lots of things as witnessed by the many and varied clubs and activities on campus.
2017 – There are 5 times as many undergraduates as there used to be, no longer the elite of secondary education system, average intelligence much lower. Have no real understanding of the practicalities of living. Rarely cook, rely on numerous takeaways, money is no issue, they are spending something they are given for free. Student houses are generally dirty and in disarray. Last year we had one houseful ask for the landlord to send an electrician to change the light bulbs as they had never done it themselves before.
The only hobby/interest most of them have involves a certain type of liquid refreshment.

The sun on the meadow is summery warmER
The stag in the forest staggers about drunk

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Auto
October 16, 2017 4:47 pm

“The Reverend Badger October 16, 2017 at 4:17 pm”

Sometime in the 80’s I worked for IBM testing computers. During one summer I had an undergrad student with me on a “work experience” week. He was, apparently, studying electronics. I found this odd because he had no idea what an AVO was and what AVO stood for.

Tom in Florida
October 16, 2017 10:57 am

Does anyone know when we will hit peak vegemite?

The Reverend Badger
Reply to  Tom in Florida
October 16, 2017 4:21 pm

Abiotic marmite will never run out, you just need a longer knife to extract it via scraping.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
October 16, 2017 6:07 pm

No way. With plenty of CO2, there is lots more lovely organic matter to make Vegemite. My only concern then is any reduction of CO2 that could impact one of Astralia’s favourite spreads.

Reply to  Graeme#4
October 19, 2017 6:49 pm

So as long as it’s good for you, you don’t care about anyone else?

Man’s influence on climate is primarily a moral issue…..

October 16, 2017 1:54 pm

600000 people in germany cant pay their elictricity…old people sitting in the cold at winter…

Reply to  https://luegenpresse2.wordpress.com/
October 16, 2017 2:13 pm

Oh, has it gone up that much now? The last report I saw was 18 months old and it was 300,000++ in Germany. And this is because Merkel can’t get her meathooks out of renewables, isn’t it?

There is going to be something very bad come out of this.

Reply to  Sara
October 17, 2017 4:39 am

It is an entirely invented figure.

It just gets plucked off the net with no basis to it.

and here’s an experiment for you: check the number of German households and work it out as a percentage. Then compare it to US published cut off data.

Oh: the green levy on German electricity is being reduced:


Reply to  Sara
October 18, 2017 12:41 am

Why would they bother to check fact you never do … quid pro quo. You ahven’t once admitted to your absolute blunders.

Reply to  Sara
October 19, 2017 3:58 pm

“It is an entirely invented figure.

It just gets plucked off the net with no basis to it.”

Yet another lie, Skanky, it is reported in ‘Der Spiegel’ here: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/service/strom-350-000-haushalte-mit-stromsperre-a-1062889.html

Are you claiming that Der Spiegel just plucks its news off the net without regard for accuracy?

Reply to  Sara
October 19, 2017 6:52 pm

Why isn’t the Australian government helping the people who need help paying their utility bills?

October 16, 2017 2:17 pm

Look on the bright side, there will be a lot fewer fat Australians…
Isn’t that what the Liberals/Progressives want? It is still for the children.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Reid
October 16, 2017 2:46 pm

Consider Venezuela under Maduro having a solution for the obesity crisis./s

October 17, 2017 12:24 am

The whole energy thing in Australia is broken. For instance I used to be on time of use billing (Peak, Shoulder and Off peak) – I got shifted onto a ‘unified rate’ with a 22% discount for paying on time – net result I’m paying 20% more!! Chasing EA now, they claim they had to change the meters, no you didn’t, the original electrician’s writing is on them and the meter numbers are the same….

Their online plan changer won’t let me change to a time of use plan – as I’m currently on a unified rate plan!! So stuck in on hold hell with ‘billing’…

I’ll need a stiff drink after this!

October 19, 2017 6:27 pm

Australia has made it clear they couldn’t care less about their energy use decisions on the rest of the planet and far into the future.

What can you say about such people, except that they’re selfish.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights