AFR: Ignoring Climate Activist Campaigns is No Longer an Option for Australian Business

Silhouette of a kangaroo on a hill at sunset

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

If you want to invest in Australia, especially in an extractive industry like coal mining, you better be prepared for intense scrutiny and bullying from climate activists and overzealous government agencies.

Why climate change is keeping directors awake

Nina Hendy
Nov 12, 2020 – 12.01am

Boards have been promising to clean up their act on climate risk for years, but 2020 is shaping up to be a year of reckoning for those yet to take decisive action.

Industry watchdogs, climate change advocates and climate-conscious consumers have been on the warpath this year. And companies that still fail to address climate change in the boardroom have been left with nowhere to hide.

Addressing climate change in the boardroom has been on the agenda for a growing number of corporate giants. 

More than 80 companies have so far ruled out being involved in the increasingly contentious Adani coal project, deeming reputational risk as being too great.

It means they won’t share in the $1 billion in contracts that the project will generate. Adani itself has rebranded its Australian arm as Bravus Mining and Resources.

Read more:

There is no chance of an Australian green revolution succeeding. Even Australia cannot keep the sun shining 24 x 7. Quite apart from the impossibly expensive materials cost, energy storage is a huge problem; parched Australia does not have have a lot of pumped hydro opportunities.

Wind power will not fix the problem; Australia experiences geographically vast wind droughts which can last entire seasons. The CSIRO predicts the wind droughts will get worse, as global warming will allegedly increase the risk of large scale blocking stationary high pressure weather systems. When such systems occur in the Summer, temperatures soar, along with demand for air-conditioning.

Batteries are impractically expensive, that huge expensive battery South Australia is so proud of is only capable of powering all of South Australia for a few minutes. I’m not even going to bother doing the calculation of the cost of the battery capacity you would need to carry Australia through a 3 month wind drought, it should be obvious this is a non-starter.

Hydrogen storage – there are substantial losses at both ends of the conversion chain. Converting renewable electricity to hydrogen results in losses, and converting the hydrogen back to electricity results in losses. Even if you have 80% efficient conversion at both steps, conversion to and from hydrogen back to electricity, you only get to keep 0.8 x 0.8 = 0.64 = 64% of the electricity you originally put in. This does not count transmission losses, energy expended to pressurise the hydrogen for storage, and leaks. You start with renewable energy which is already so expensive it needs a subsidy or market distorting mandatory purchase regulations, and end up with hydrogen energy which is at least twice as expensive as the original already unaffordable renewable energy.

Given what activists are demanding is financially impossible, all activist pressure on Australian companies can achieve is capital flight, as businesses which can relocate get fed up with unreliable electricity and being the bad guy, and get fed up with paying Danegeld to a growing alphabet soup of environmental organisations, whose disruptive activities appear to be increasingly supported by over zealous government bureaucrats.

Correction (EW): AFR not FT.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 11, 2020 10:10 pm

… and what’s up with the U.S. in this regard? Are we also going down under — or up over?

Ron Long
Reply to  noaaprogrammer
November 12, 2020 2:00 am

The Biden Team has just announced that “climate Change# will be an important issue across all federal agencies. Remember President Obama made climate change a Defense Department issue? Stand by for full on stupid. Recounts? It doesn’t appear that the numbers are there. Senate? The last hope for saving the nation, Republicans need to wind one of the two Georgia runoffs, otherwise it’s 50-50 and VP Kamala is the tie-breaker.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Ron Long
November 12, 2020 1:34 pm

Biden, in his first coms with the Aussie PM talked about COVID-19 and climate change.

Zig Zag Wanderer
November 11, 2020 10:18 pm

Batteries are impractically expensive, that huge expensive battery South Australia is so proud of is only capable of powering all of South Australia for a few minutes.

That was my calculation, 3 minutes IIRC. Added to that is the fact that even if that were possible, the battery would explode.

It’s not useless, but only required because of unreliables, and not very useful even then. It does make a lot of (taxpayers’) money because the market is so violently skewed by unreliables, however.

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 11, 2020 10:28 pm

The SA battery company has been making a MOTZA ..

… because the battery is almost in constant use trying to stabilise the SA electricity grid.

November 11, 2020 10:27 pm

What sort of DISGUSTING RACIST people are these, that want to deprive people from India a chance of reliable electricity supplies. !!

Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 10:43 am

Don’t worry, the project is well under way with their coal wagons fleet being built as we speak. It’s best these virtue signaling fools stay out of the way.

November 11, 2020 10:29 pm

I’ve been listening to climate skeptics for decades- First it was “you’ll never get to 10% renewable” the it was “you’ll never get to 30% renewable”, and so on. Nevertheless here we are already at about 25-30%, with Gigawatts of renewable power being added every few months. No surprise, as wind and solar are the cheapest power sources.

A few points- storage doesn’t require abundant water- lifting and releasing a weight will do the trick, as will compressed air, or molten salt. Batteries were never meant for bulk storage, only for auxiliary grid services.

I don’t know where you have conjured up these “wind droughts that last seasons” as they don’t exist- the link you gave was not supportive. There are certainly times of more or less wind, but not for an entire season.

Reply to  Tony
November 11, 2020 11:56 pm

also this site has continually forecast the arctic sea ice is at the bottom of a cycle for the last 10 years and that there would be imminent grid failure in Germany and that the ice age/cold was coming back. We also don’t now here about the ‘abandoned wind turbines’ or see those charts of Soviet sea ice, which prove it was lower in the 30s (as now it clearly wasn’t).

Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 12, 2020 8:21 am

The UK is never going to be ‘several months’ without wind and so long as there is daylight there is still some solar.

(I notice you don’t refute the points I made about Watts coverage)

The UK has wind widely distributed, 10GW of HVDC connectivity to multiple countries on the way, tidal, demand response, biomass, nuclear and solar, plus grid scale and pumped storage for peaking demand and frequency response.

do we have the annual one or two periods of low wind/dull days/winter temps entirely covered by renewables in 2020? No. But it seems reasonable to assume we can do it.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 11:48 am

griff biomass as a form of ‘clean’ energy is a complete fantasy. Burning wood produces more CO2 than coal does. The UK doesn’t have any more forests that it’s willing to burn so they’re importing it from the US and Canada. Shipping is one of the big emitters of CO2 around so in what way does biomass make sense in your AGW world?

The most logical UK energy source that you mentioned was nuclear, and you’re doing away with that. Clean, efficient and reliable. Makes no sense.

Emily Daniels
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 1:49 pm


A complete non-sequitur. The article is about Australia, so Eric was asking you to weigh in on suggestions for getting through extended periods of windless times there, which do happen. The wind situation in UK is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Or are you basically saying that since it doesn’t affect you, what happens in Australia isn’t your concern?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 4:11 pm

At DRAX they have to burn more wood for each Kw generated, which produces more CO2. Then the wood chips have to be shipped thousands of miles by ship that, out in international water, burn the dirtiest fuel available. It’s complete nonsense given DRAX was deliberately built on a productive coal field.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:37 am

No griff, Arctic sea ice is NOWHERE NEAR the Holocene norm yet

Still in the top 5-10%

Just a little bit down from the extreme high extent caused by the the rapid freezing to the LIA.

comment image

When are you going to accept that fact. !

And yes it was similar from the around the 1940s

comment image

Arctic temperature prove that.

comment image

the LIA and the late 1970s were the anomaly… EXTREME high extents… totally ABNORMAL..

Pity you don’t understand basic science, isn’t it.

You poor small-minded little sock. !

Craig from Oz
Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 5:47 am

Germans attempted to run blockade runners across the North Pole to Japan during WW2.

It didn’t actually work, but there was enough sea room to make the plan one that was worth considering.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
November 12, 2020 3:12 pm

The German raider Komet did cross the USSR Northern Route circa August 1940 and went on during 1940 sinking allied shipping in the Pacific and around the Antipodes.
See my blog “German raider Komet passage north Siberia 1940”
and 1940 Raiders timeline.

Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 8:22 am

Fred, it is lower than it has been since the end of the Eemian. It is very certainly lower than it was at any point in the whole 20th century.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:28 pm


you are a LIAR who ignores science, because you have none.

Its been much lower than now for most of the last 10,000 years

comment image
comment image

Its only down slightly from the extreme highs of the LIA

Probably about similar in the 1930s/40s

The temperatures how that. basically the same temperature as now maybe a tad warmer..

comment image

So unless you are saying that temperature and sea ice are unrelated, you have absolutely nothing back up your slimy little LIES.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 1:08 am

griff… you should be CHEERING instead of yapping mindlessly….

Or were you UNAWARE that from 27/10 – 9/11 was the fastest fortnightly Arctic sea ice growth since 1979.

You certainly seem to be totally unaware of basically anything close to reality.

Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 2:26 am

The question is not reality per se. Experts can always find facts to bolster their position. They are very much like conspiracy theorists in that regard.

The problem is context. If you just look at the satellite era, the arctic ice is suffering. It’s still below 2012 levels and the temperature is well above normal so it doesn’t look like a stellar year for ice building. link In the context of the whole Holocene, however, the ice cover is much heavier than normal. Check out this WUWT article, Figure 13 in particular.

So, what’s the proper context? If you’re trying to pump up the alarmism, stick with the satellite record. If you’re trying to counter the alarmism, the last 10,000 years is the context you need.

If you’re interested in reality, the question is, what’s normal? Is the decreasing arctic ice proof of man’s effect on global warming? Maybe only if you’re a conspiracy theorist.

One of the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory is resistance to falsification. If we had record high ice coverage in the arctic, someone in the alarmist community would take that as proof of global warming. So, just take any observation and claim it proves your theory.

Reply to  commieBob
November 12, 2020 8:27 am

With respect, I don’t think the ice level across the whole Holocene is relevant: clearly as we have moved through the era the climate has varied and at the moment there’s a clear negative ongoing trend for the ice, due to current climate drivers.

What happened in the past is interesting and some of the drivers are still in play – but what we need to think about is the next 5, 10 and 50 years and how it affects us this century.

Reply to  commieBob
November 12, 2020 12:35 pm

Youhave NO respect for science

The FACT that the LIA was the coldest period in 10,000 years is HIGHLY RELEVANT

The slight RECOVERY from that bleak devastatingly cold period of EXTREME high levels of sea ice h as done wonders for the Arctic. But that RECOVERY has stalled at a point FAR ABOVE the Holocene norm.

Not only is the land surface GREENING, but the seas are also springing BACK to life after being TOO COLD and frozen over for much of the last 500 or so years (coldest period of the Holocene)

The drop in sea ice slightly toward the pre-LIA levels has opened up the food supply for the nearly extinct Bowhead Whale, and they are returning to the waters around Svalbard.–whale-food-returns/1401824

The Blue Mussel is also making a return, having been absent for a few thousand years, apart from a brief stint during the MWP.

Many other species of whale are also returning now that the sea ice extent has dropped from the extreme highs of the LIA. Whales cannot swim on ice. !

Great thing is, that because of fossil fuels and plastics, they will no longer be hunted for whale blubber for lamps and for whale bone.

Hopefully the Arctic doesn’t re-freeze too much in the next AMO cycle, and these glorious creatures get a chance to survive and multiply.

WHY do you continue to express such HATRED for Arctic sea life?

1… Do you have any evidence at all that the highly beneficial drop in Arctic sea ice from the extreme highs of the LIA and late 1970s has any human causation.

2… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?

3… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be scientifically proven to be of human causation?

Betting you will just run away again, without a single bit of evidence your back up your dead parrot AGW mantra regurgitations.

Reply to  commieBob
November 12, 2020 1:21 pm

“due to current climate drivers.”

NONE of which are human.

You keep proving that by you abject inability to produce any evidence.

“I don’t think the ice level across the whole Holocene is relevant:”

And yes we know the only way you can keep the FEEBLE fantasies alive in your tiny little mind, is by rabid CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL.

Flight Level
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 1:40 am

Griffy, schools and training are for a purpose. Engineers do the engineering, surgeons the brain surgery, pilots the flying.

Politics and rental love are probably the only trades where qualifications/grades/diplomas/licenses are not required.

Therefore the confusion on which you leverage your posts.

Reply to  Flight Level
November 12, 2020 8:23 am

I’m sorry, I really have no idea what you are on about!

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 10:10 am

Yes, you have no idea, that is the point.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:36 pm

You never do..

You are INCAPABLE of understanding anything dealing with science, engineering or REALITY.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 5:45 am

And in Planet Griff clouds do not affect the output of solar panels.

Also in Planet Griff, despite the fact there is a fortune to be made with the Green Revolution, the West is too late because China has already gotten in on the ground floor.

When is your epic fantasy novel coming out?

George RRRRRRRR Martin isn’t going to finish a Song of Ice and Fire anytime soon, you could cut deeply into his market.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
November 12, 2020 8:24 am

The don’t switch then on and off in a sort of flicker effect, as Watts readers seem to think.

Cloud effects across a wide area in which solar is installed drop the output, but not suddenly or totally

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:38 pm

WRONG, A solid cloud passing over a cluster of panels will cause a large drop-of very quickly

You are just making up arrant BS , as you always do.

Reply to  Tony
November 11, 2020 11:58 pm

A few points- storage doesn’t require abundant water- lifting and releasing a weight will do the trick
…uhm, what, exactly is pumped storage of water if not lifting and releasing a weight?
The reason pumped storage is the go to is that it is many times more cost effective than mechanical systems like trains loaded with concrete like they are trying and failing to make work in Nevada.

as will compressed air, or molten salt.
The reason these aren’t in wide use (or any use for that matter) is that they are highly inefficient, waste most of the energy they are supposed to store, and are absurdly expensive to maintain.

Batteries were never meant for bulk storage, only for auxiliary grid services.
Ever drop into a Tesla investment site where they are gushing over the prospect of using millions of Tesla’s for bulk storage? Perhaps you should go let them know?

First it was “you’ll never get to 10% renewable” the it was “you’ll never get to 30% renewable”
…uhm no. First it was you’ll never get past 15 to 20% renewables without driving the cost of electricity through the roof and decades later it is STILL 15 to 20%

Gigawatts of renewable power being added every few months. No surprise, as wind and solar are the cheapest power sources.
They could be FREE and it wouldn’t change anything. The cost of dealing with the variability of unreliables is many times the value of the electricity they produce. “the cost of electricity will necessarily sky rocket” ~ Barak Obama

Reply to  davidmhoffer
November 12, 2020 5:30 am
Reply to  Enginer01
November 12, 2020 11:34 am

Build a flywheel big enough to back up a grid-level power station and you are looking at massive stored energies. Have it fail catastrophically and you are looking at energy releases on par with a tactical nuke.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
November 12, 2020 8:29 am

Lots of places now past 30%, 40% and 50%.

Only in early adopters like Denmark and Germany are prices high – and in Germany the price is NOt entirely down to renewables.

and of course households in those 2 countries are energy efficient, use less electricity and are also very likely to have their own solar or shares in a wind enterprise

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 9:22 am

Name them Griff.
Note -PEAKs of 30 to 50% don’t count.
Note -backup from conventional has to be part of the equation. The cost is there, if not in the cost of the electricity, then somewhere else, and that has to be taken into account .

To be fair, your list should include a second list where wind and solar are not practical at all. That list will make your list look so small that you may as well skip it. Which you probably will since there’s not much you can put on it.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:42 pm

“Lots of places now past 30%, 40% and 50%.”

STOP the deliberate LIES, griffLIAR…

NOWHERE in the world reaches these levels for more than a TINY FRACTION of the time

Even in Germany wind and solar only make up some 6.4% of primary energy.

Iain Reid
Reply to  Tony
November 12, 2020 12:19 am


it is irrefutable that as the wind and solar proportion of grid supply increases and inertia inevitably decreases then the grid frequency becomes more unstable. The resources to try and balance that becomes more expensive and complex and must eventually, become impractical (In the U.K. we are well over £1.5 billion this year for balancing costs, all cost directly attributable to renewables). That is why renewables are not cheap as you claim, when all costs are included.

Also consider that when a grid trip occurs, it takes far longer to restore if a large proportion of the grid supply is wind and solar as they are asynchronous sources of power.

It doesn’t matter what sort of storage you envisage, it requires too much capacity to be feasible for covering intermittency and so we must have sufficient generation capacity to cover for the times of low renewable output. Essentially we have a large overcapacity in total generation but only some of it can be relied on, again a cost factor.

I can’t comment on Australia’s weather but teh U.K. suffers regular high pressure weather and hence virtual no wind generation and very often with no solar either. And yet our shortsighted government are insisting on closing viable coal stations and putting all their fuel eggs in one basket, namely gas which is stretched in winter to supply all the requiremenst for heating as well as power.

Reply to  Iain Reid
November 12, 2020 12:55 am

A couple of month ago there was a period of a couple of weeks when wind in Australia forgot to eat beans

NADA.. Nothing !!

Reply to  Iain Reid
November 12, 2020 8:17 am

A grid scale battery responds faster to a grid outage/frequency issue than anything else. That’s why the National Grid is so keen on them in the UK – they are mainly frequency response.

solar and wind do not make the grid frequency more unstable: you do need to cover for more potential supply sites going offline.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 9:06 am
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:42 pm

“solar and wind do not make the grid frequency more unstable”

LYING yet again .

Stop it.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 1:32 pm

“solar and wind do not make the grid frequency more unstable:”


Then there is no need for massive , hughly expensive batteries for frequency stabilisation, is there .

That is what they are for.. that is their ONLY function, to stabilise the grid because of the erratic unreliable nature of wind and solar.

You poor pitifully ignorant fool..

you have yet again proven that you are TOTALLY CLUELESS about EVERYTHING. !

Reply to  Tony
November 12, 2020 12:48 am

Currently, must be windy in SA Solar providing ZERO of the NEM

Wind providing 13% Coal and Gas providing 77%

Let’s see what the lowest wind goes to this month shall we 😉

From 11am – 3pm on 9th Nov… wind was providing ZERO%


ALWAYS having to be backed up by COAL and GAS.

Reply to  Tony
November 12, 2020 10:57 am

Just check for energy production state by state. QLD’s peak wind energy production for the last 11 hours has been at a meagre 0.2GW for an average demand over the period of 7GW. So, you need at least a 80GWh battery to cover energy demand just for QLD. And it’s the same with NSW.

November 11, 2020 10:36 pm

The government has enough sceptics in the coalition to actually fight back. Put Craig Kelly in charge of environment and Matt Canavan in charge of energy and take on the climate cult. Privatise the ABC and restructure education curricula to present the sceptical arguments on climate charge. It’s politically inept to think there is a middle road here that works, cause any weakness will just embolden the left further.

Reply to  Zigmaster
November 12, 2020 2:04 am

Zigmaster, a plan, I like it! How refreshing!

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Zigmaster
November 12, 2020 6:33 am


I’ve been arguing since he came into office years ago that Trump should stand up to the alarmists and push back against them here in the U.S., but he did next to nothing. Now Biden is going to be in the White House from the looks of it, and a climate alarmist agenda is high on his list of priorities. I fear we will pay a dear price for it.

I remain at a lose to understand why it appears to be sacrilege or heresy in politics to stand up to the alarmists and discredit them with all the refuting scientific evidence that throws CAGW into serious doubt. I don’t know if it is a lack of intestinal fortitude, a lack of understanding, or what. It’s been going on for 32 years now with no end in sight.

Same thing with the myth that wind and solar are commercially viable as replacements for fossil fuels and nuclear. The very fact that they require a lot of govt $$$ and mandates tells us something. It tells us that they cannot stand by themselves on their own two feet in the free market, and the renewables industry is nothing but an artificial product of govt pandering to the wind and solar pushers. It is an industry almost totally devoid of intellect.

There is talk now that Biden will shut down the economy here in the U.S. when he enters office because of the COVID-19 virus. I try to be optimistic, but I have to say that I have a bad feeling in my gut about the next four years here in the U.S. This all adds to my cynicism of politicians.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
November 12, 2020 7:20 am

I remain at a loss, not lose.

November 11, 2020 10:48 pm

Austrack know China is pouring money into Australia via intermediaries but unfortunately there’s no crime.
Most recipients are green organisations promoting renewables.
Increasing electricity prices helps China vacuum-up Australia’s energy intensive manufacturing (of all sizes) and also boosts income for their electricity businesses here in particular Tango (Pacific Hydro) which is 100% owned by the CCP.
China also involved in the great hydrogen con jointly promoting this criminal enterprise with Australian academia:
And here’s the hydrogen con laid-out for you . . .
And here’s a peek at the first chink in our armor for Belt & Road by the Morrison Government . . .
And here’s classic Morrison Government hypocrisy on full display . . .

Reply to  Warren
November 12, 2020 11:23 am

Warren, Energy Australia is wholly own by the Chinese. As of 2018 dispite billions in revenue they had not paid any taxes in Australia. They also own Australian mines and windfarms.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Megs
November 12, 2020 4:38 pm

“Megs November 12, 2020 at 11:23 am

Warren, Energy Australia is wholly own by the Chinese.”

I think I will be changing my suppliers knowing this now.

Chris Hanley
November 11, 2020 11:15 pm

The second driest (second to Antarctica) and flattest continent on Earth doesn’t offer much scope for storage of so-called utility-scale renewable energy output.
Australia does have ‘the largest known single deposit of uranium in the world’ at the Olympic Dam mine (Wiki).
But Australians are very fastidious people and would not dream of processing the dangerous stuff onshore or, heaven forfend, actually using it to generate electricity, so like its poisonous coal it is all shamefacedly exported to less discriminating foreigners.

November 12, 2020 12:31 am

Perhaps the penny has finally dropped in the UK. Rolls Royce are building small modular reactors.

Reply to  JeffC
November 12, 2020 1:15 am


WHEN !! ??

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 1:57 am

When inverters and governments stop wasting our money on the useless extra cost and investment in wind and solar – that’s when!

Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 8:14 am

Exactly, Fred.

finally something we agree on.


Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:46 pm

Wind and solar….. when will it ever provide CONSTANT , RELIABLE electricity..


At least when these are eventually brought on-line that will accomplish that which wind and solar NEVER CAN.

They have a FUTURE..

wind and solar.. a non-solution to a non-problem.

They will die an unnatural death, leaving rotting cells and turbines to be tidied up all over the world.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  JeffC
November 12, 2020 1:50 am

Their brochure must be written by Griff:

Rolls-Royce believes its SMR design will:
• Provide 220MW to 440MW of power, depending on the
configuration, that’s the equivalent of up to 150 onshore
wind turbines

So that is 150 2MW turbines onshore of name plate capacity.
However, nameplate capacity is bull, let’s say CF is 25%, this would give 600 turbines.
But, you cannot compare hens and eggs. The single SMR gives reliable power, the 600 turbines are just a devastating extra installation, which cannot substitute the single SMR.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 12, 2020 8:13 am

Actually I’m a skeptic on the Rolls SMR design…

At the moment its what developers call ‘vaporware’… no operating prototype and no clear timescale for delivering one.

Ask me again in 5 years… or 10.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:52 pm

“call ‘vaporware’”

Like batteries big enough to allow wind and solar to become dispatchable, hey griff.

Wind and solar will always be UNRELIABLE and a drain on the electricity supply system.

The more there is the mor unstable the whole system becomes.

Hoping you get some nice long “load shedding” periods in your area this winter or next, griff.

And as the AMO turns, and more and more stress is put on the UK system in winter, you will get exactly what you deserve 🙂

Carl Friis-Hansen
November 12, 2020 1:17 am

and get fed up with paying Danegeld to a growing alphabet soup of environmental organisations

I like the term Danegeld and add to that Danlaw.
However, there are some deviating interpretations of Danegeld. I recall this one from my school years:

The Danegeld was a tax raised to pay tribute to the Viking raiders to save a land from being ravaged.



The northern, central and eastern parts of Anglo-Saxon England in which Danish law and custom were observed

The Free Directory

At the time the vikings were almost everywhere where there was trading to do and people to control and dominate. – A bit like where Alphabet is everywhere and control our actions, culture and business through censorship, rather than tax.

Patrick MJD
November 12, 2020 1:18 am

There will be no industry in Aus, apart from the migrant and housing ponzi industry. It will fail. The griff has no idea. His country, Britain, also my former country, will (Already is) be overrun by migrants wanting free stuff.

November 12, 2020 2:16 am

“that huge expensive battery South Australia is so proud of is only capable of powering all of South Australia for a few minutes” lets have a sensible discussion, you know , we all know , that not what it is there for. Batteries in any grid have nothing to do with basic capacity provision.

Reply to  yarpos
November 12, 2020 3:08 am

The fact is, they do not produce any electricity what so ever.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 12, 2020 8:11 am
Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 12:55 pm

Another designed PURELY to regulate the ERRATIC INCONSISTENCIES of wind and solar.

Massive expense for solving the problems of introducing erratic, unreliable sources onto a grid.

The whole thing has been a TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, hasn’t it griff

An IDIOT’S solution to a FANTASY problem.

Reply to  griff
November 12, 2020 1:50 pm

Victoria STILL uses upwards of 75% brown coal,

Brown coal is a rock steady frequency controlling supply.

but it cannot ramp up and down quickly.

So the battery will be charged using electricity from BROWN COAL ..

….and used to try to counter the INHERENTLY ERRATIC frequency de-stabilising nature of wind turbines.

Reply to  fred250
November 12, 2020 5:06 pm

Also the only viable replacement even being discussed is gas.

In a funny somewhat semi-related move South Australia has become the latest state to place a tax on electric cars because they don’t pay fuel excise which pays for the roads. The greentards are upset but someone has to pay for the roads and the existing mechanism is fuel tax.

Al Miller
November 12, 2020 7:23 am

Aus – so sad you have given up! Not that we are far behind in Canada…Just lie down and let the Green$ decide your fate – while they live it up.

Reply to  Al Miller
November 12, 2020 5:09 pm

You confuse what actually happens to what the greentards are calling for, the PM has already said a polite no.

Reply to  LdB
November 12, 2020 9:03 pm

LdB could you please clarify what he’s saying no to. I am smack bang in the middle of the first of three Renewable Energy Zones here 8n NSW and they are tearing up tens of thousands of hectares of our beautiful agricultural countryside and installing solar and wind.

Don’t think you can trust the PM, he’s already sucking up to Biden.

Reply to  Megs
November 12, 2020 9:05 pm

should be ‘in’ NSW. Bloody fat fingers!

November 12, 2020 10:39 am

Alt headline…

Ignoring China is no longer an option

November 12, 2020 6:39 pm

It is a fact of Australian political life that the resources industry while so dominant in our export $’s – only has a small number of supporters in the ranks of politicians and media.
Conversely – minority anti-mining sentiment is widely present throughout Australia and squadrons of public and private funded journalists are working 24/7 on stories painting the resources industry in the worst light possible. Public funded greenleft “environmental defenders” orgs infest the States and wreak greenleft lawfare in any regulatory situation that looks fruitful for them. This leads to delays up to a decade for some mining projects approvals. I see no signs of any reversal in the above so I assume the “climate” the resources industry has to work in is getting worse.
States administer lands and resources not the Commonwealth and mineral rights normally reside with the Crown (the State). For decades resources explorers holding mineral exploration titles issued by the State were assured of access to rural lands to conduct their mineral exploration. The political basis for this was presumably that the wealth generated by exploiting resources was spread around to the population in the State by the mine paying wages, buying supplies, helping keep country towns viable, paying State and Commonwealth taxes and paying mineral royalties to the State Govt. However a visitor from Mars reading our media and monitoring our political life would take away little sign that anybody on planet Oz appreciated their wealth generated from resources.
So referring to the headline – “Ignoring Climate Activist Campaigns…” may not worry many resources companies already being kicked from pillar to post around the wide brown land.

Reply to  wazz
November 12, 2020 9:23 pm

Wazz mining magnate and billionaire ‘Twiggy’ Forest wants to place an each way bet, can’t loose. He and a billionaire mate are looking to build a 10 gigawatt Solar installation with battery backup in the Northern Territory near Tennent Creek and will send the energy to Singapore.

Even if they can pull this off, what’s going to happen when Singapore tells them to go shove their electricity because it’s way too expensive. By then Twiggy and his mate will have ripped off the government of its subsidies and he would have made a motza on any mined materials he could send off to be processed and manufactured overseas.

What’s more, the Northern Territory will be lumped with tens of millions of toxic solar panels because no one is willing to deal with them. Likely more government funds.

November 12, 2020 9:57 pm

This project involving Twiggy Forrest and Atlassian guy hit the news-waves a year ago – I say as long as they and their co-investors pay for it all – keeping the financing private – go for it.
And solve your own Native title issues – not to mention endangered finch issues – the mountain of red & green tape from NT & WA – happy solving to you and your shareholders.
Note that on the way to Singers there is a deep ocean trench for your power cable to cross, subduction zone, volcanically and seismically active – good luck with all that engineering to cross one of the planet’s great fracture zones. Just keep Commonwealth taxpayers money out of it.
Can an expert estimate the percentage transmission loss between Tennant Creek and Singapore?

Reply to  wazz
November 12, 2020 10:23 pm

Wazz I would dearly love to see this project sink, I wouldn’t waste one cent on renewables. There’s been more than enough wasted in the past two decades. My concern is the 150 square (plus) kilometres that will be poisoned in the process. Not to mention the displaced flora and fauna that are bulldozed away beforehand.

I’m not sure whether or not they get a share of the subsidies, I hope not. But then there’s still the question of the clean up down the track. That’s going to be alot of panels. I hope they loose alot of money, and are served with the clean up bill too.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights