Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Surging fossil fuel use and exports, no large scale carbon pricing scheme, no carbon target – almost as if the Australian government and the people who voted them into office think the climate crisis is a total joke.
Report highlights Australia’s performance on climate change compared to others in the G20
The weaknesses in Australia’s performance on a key issue compared to other G20 countries has been highlighted in a new report.
Charis Chang
November 18, 2020Australia’s record on climate change compared to other G20 countries has come under scrutiny in a new report.
The 2020 Climate Transparency Report, an annual collaboration between 14 think tanks and non-governmental organisations, is aimed at encouraging ambitious climate action.
The report has highlighted Australia’s poor performance as having one of the highest rates of subsidies for fossil fuels, for being one of only two countries not implementing a carbon pricing scheme and being one of the worst performers when it comes to emissions reduction in transport, energy efficient buildings and deforestation.
…
“Evidence suggests that COVID-19 recovery responses, thus far, have been disproportionately directed towards emissions-intensive and environmentally-damaging sectors,” the report notes. “This could contribute to emissions rebounding at a faster rate.”
…
Read more: https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/report-highlights-australias-performance-on-climate-change-compared-to-others-in-the-g20/news-story/fcf0cc359c4a8b102176aa5951553331
The climate transparency report is available here.
I don’t understand why greens are so upset about the lack of climate targets and carbon pricing. Surely when Australians accept the CSIRO assertion that solar and wind power are the cheapest sources of energy, Australians will embrace renewables of their own free will, without the need for government targets and other forms of coercion.
Do I need the /sarc tag?
Most Aussies are pretty sensible and know a scam when they see one.
C’mon they eat joeys
Kangaroo is quite a dark meat, strong flavour, not everyone likes the taste, though most people don’t notice the flavour if you use it in a curry or chilli. Used to be the cheap option but lately its become fashionable, more expensive than beef.
makes a great ragout or sauce for spaghetti bollognaise
Skippy, like venison, doesn’t have any fat. If you like well done, then forget about eating it and attach to your shoe for walking. As for the taste, it’s not that different. We eat chicken, duck, turkey and other birds, they all have different tastes. Although I don’t think I’d like eating crow.
When the first person ate chicken, and was asked what it tasted like, what was his response?
This question, and others, haunt me…
Minced and mixed with some lamb mince, they make great burgers.
It’s good for people like me who suffer from blood related issues. It is quite bland and has a slight “cows liver” taste IMO. Needs a good marinade and then just shown the flame.
Substitute kangaroo meat for other options in a slow cooked meal, bit of red wine, served on a bed of rustic, skin on mashed potatoes….Yumm!
“Megs November 20, 2020 at 12:17 am”
That sounds quite nice, might give it a go one day!
Anytime large groups of people live in large cities, they tend to become completely divorced from the reality of how the world works. When it comes to the large population centers, I suspect you are incorrect in your assertion.
As a city dweller in Australia, I can confirm that you are correct with the inner, more exclusive areas harbouring those who are the most divorced from reality. Delusion is a luxury that only the wealthy can afford.
“Most Aussies are pretty sensible…”
Here, here.
“in large cities, they tend to become completely divorced from the reality…”
Here, here, bravo.
Wait, Australia is the most urbanised country.
Loy of course is the total opposite of “sensible”
… and is most certainly totally divorced from reality.
Loy the loon, still thinks that atmospheric CO2 causes warming, despite not being able to find one iota of actual scientific proof for the fantasy.
So sad.. so loopy.. so loy !
”“in large cities, they tend to become completely divorced from the reality…”
Here, here, bravo.”
people in large cities….. meaning those who think reading the Guardian and drinking a latte in the local university gardens after going to vote for the Greens is being in touch with reality.
Once again Loydo demonstrates that she can’t handle complex topics. The idea that country can have a lot of rural areas and also have big cities causes a mental breakdown.
“Loydo November 19, 2020 at 4:37 pm
Wait, Australia is the most urbanised”
Wrong again.
country.https://www.statista.com/statistics/672109/top-ten-most-urbanized-countries-worldwide/
Once again MarkW demonstrates that she can’t make a comment without resorting to some twisted, non-sequiter interpretation of what was nothing but a trivial (but accurate) joke. Sorry for inadvertently triggering you.
Once again , Loy-do’h shows that he/she nothing to offer to rational conversation or thought.
Sorry you are perpetually triggered, Loy !!!…
Loydo,
Do try the correct way, the words are “Hear, hear”. Geoff S
Most urban folks today think electricity comes from a wall socket and meat for the BBQ comes from the supermarket, or magically appears beautifully prepared out the kitchen on a waiter’s serving platter at their favorite restaurant.
So divorced from the supply chain realities they are, they are willing to support Elitists’ decisions but they have no idea how it will disrupt the affordability one day of those expections.
“Shoki Kandea November 19, 2020 at 2:03 pm”
Yeah nah!
Have you seen how many states and territories are Labor controlled?
The so-called fossil fuel subsidy is classic greenie misinformation. They refer to the rebates of road tax that mines receive for fuel used in vehicles that do not use public roads. The same rebate that is available to farmers and anyone else who pays the road tax on diesel, but then uses it in vehicles that don’t use public roads.
Yes, when a report starts with a BLATANT LIE, one just has to consign it to the circular file where it belongs.
Real subsidy payments to fossil fuel producers are almost non-existant. Usually they are fuel tax refunds to identifiable industries to reduce a societal cost of some identifiable industry such as agriculture. A favorite of mine was a report in Canada that included the entire fuel expenditures for the Canadian armed forces and all government vehicles, and heating fuel for northern communities in their “oil industry subsidy” total.
Fossil Fuel subsidies being a blatant lie….
Real subsidy payments to fossil fuel producers are almost non-existant. Usually they are fuel tax refunds to identifiable industries to reduce a societal cost of some identifiable industry such as agriculture. A favorite of mine was a report in Canada that included the entire fuel expenditures for the Canadian armed forces and all government vehicles, and heating fuel for northern communities in their “oil industry subsidy” total.
Maybe St. Greta of Angst needs to sail down to Oz and set you Aussies straight?
No kid her age can cope with the separation anxiety of a couple of months of slow, low quality satellite internet.
Global… climate cooling…. warming…. change. Undeniable. Unfalsifiable. A model. A conflation of logical domains. Surely, a double-edged scalpel.
To hear that there is surging fossil fuel use and exports, no large scale carbon pricing scheme, and no carbon target reminds me again how sensible the Australian electorate is and how it can sniff out a scam when it is offered. The only non-scam item on the Green Market is a solar hot water unit on the roof which works well in almost all of Australia to save money.
Although that will still take 5 to 10 years to return investment, depending on location, electricity costs & usage. For me, with average 2.5 people, living in the tropics, it works take 6 years to break even. Fortunately we use most hot water in winter, not in summer when there is less sun (bc of the rainy season), but night time power rates make it relatively cheap anyway.
Happily, though, it won’t prevent firies from putting out a burning house, unlike PV.
It’s more than a joke. It’s a collection of parasites that want money and power.
Those who will never be negatively financially affected by “carbon” schemes are always enthusiastic supporters.
As with socialism.
(something about being more equal than others . . . )
The Australian federal government and state governments with coal assets (of both stripes) have acted like the PR division of the coal industry for years, so it is absolutely no surprise Australia is THE global laggard on just about every energy related field you can name.
The toadying, pandering, anti-democratic corruption and revolving doorism is going to be disatrous for Australia’s long term economic health as billions of taxpayer’s dollars get poured into the black hole of stranded assets.
Yes, most Aussies ARE sensible and have for years have been overwhelmingly in favour of phasing out coal for energy production. Every opinion poll for a decade now has shown this.
How boring. A progressive declaring that any time the result is not to their liking, it must be because of anti-democratic forces.
Then the search for guilty parties to execute begins.
Nobody in their right mind thinks that wind and solar are viable. Of course, it’s quite obvious that there is no such thing as a progressive in their right mind.
But as has been demonstrably proven many times recently, people don’t vote or act as they tell pollsters or circles of family & friends they say they’re going to.
And who can blame them?
Lloydo – re “Australia is THE global laggard on just about every energy related field you can name“: When you say “energy” you are no doubt following the usual mealy-mouthed misuse of language as other greenies. So assuming that what you really mean isn’t “energy” but “renewables”, I would like to point out that South Australia has as much wind+solar energy per capita as just about any other country or state on the planet. NSW gets more hydro energy per capita than most other countries or states. Australia is also looking to spend $2,000 per capita on producing Hydrogen from solar, and is well on its way to completing “Snowy 2.0” which will store excess renewable energy in hydro facilities.
I don’t think that Australia should have done or be doing any of those things, so I find it doubly offensive when someone like you who could be expected to applaud them, instead tries to claim that they haven’t and aren’t doing them.
Opinion polls are notoriously unreliable.
RUBBISH yet again from Loy
Many countries NEED coal, Australia has some of the best and most accessible there is
Any government that DIDN’T make sure the income from the sale of such coal would be behaving in a totally IRRATIONAL manner.
Only the inner -city left-wing gullible fools that you “hang” with are DUMB enough not to realise the importance of those coal exports continuing and increasing.
Opinion polls by the far-left.. MEANINGLESS. !!
Coal CONTRIBUTES to the Australian economy.. something you will never do.
Wind and solar are the real money sucking boondoggle. !! Contribution .. ZERO. !
“The toadying, pandering, anti-democratic corruption “
You mean to the greenie anti-human agenda, don’t you loy. !!
Yep, that toadying and corruption to the green agenda MUST be battled before it drags down the Australian economy to the socialist/marxist totalitarian sewer that you and you ilk want it to be.
We absolutely MUST stop pouring taxpayer subsidies and favours into the UNRELIABLE energy sector.
All those stranded wind turbines and solar cells in 10 years time will take a lot of tidying.
Loydo obviously lives under a bridge because her assertions about coal being phased out are stupidly wrong and note she gave no source for such a claim …. its called greentard wishful thinking.
“… most Aussies ARE sensible and have for years have been overwhelmingly in favour of phasing out coal for energy production …”
Yet we didn’t elect Bill Shorten, who promised to do just that. The one poll which mattered, climate concern was not the deciding factor.
Bravo, spoken like a true-blue greenie-weenie airhead. Phasing out a source of energy which is cheap and dependable is stupid on steroids.
“dollars get poured into the black hole”
You’ve got it wrong Loydo. The reality is the dollars that are pouring OUT of the black hole. Queensland would go bankrupt without it. Southern states will black out without it. And the silly Chinese tap dance going on at the moment will make no difference. The poor quality stuff from Mongolia is no substitute for top-quality coal from Queensland. Haven’t seen too many protesters up here recently. They read the opinion polls and stay away.
Loydo, if you want to cut your own personal use of fossil fuels at home, feel free. Walk around your house to your electricity meter and flick the big red button. It’s like only using green power, but enforced by physics instead of pretention.
You mean all those new coal fired power stations, with a lfe expectancy of about 50 years, will not burn coal thus leaving them stranded? 😛
In their lovely graph of Energy Miix in G20 countries Australia is listed at 30%. That must be nameplate capacity not actual output.;)
Wrong graph. Share of Renewables in Power Generation.
Hydro is considered “renewable” and does provide quite a bit of electricity from the Snowy Mountains and from Tasmania.
Yeah. Forgot about that. The clean energy report 2019 reference gives Australia 24% renewables, Hydro 25.7% of that 24%.
https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/resources/resources-hub/clean-energy-australia-report
And I read the graph wrong. Just under 30%.
I remember the last Australian socialist government passed a carbon tax scheme that was so unpopular that the government was sacked after a no confidence vote in Parliament. Australia is a Parliamentary democracy and it’s citizens like those in the USA a representative republic overwhelmingly oppose carbon taxes. In US because of federalism deeply BLUE states have imposed carbon taxes; because, the Federal government has allowed them even though the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the Federal government power to control interstate commerce. Since, carbon taxes affect products & services that are in interstate commerce Congress or via executive action could ban carbon taxes. Carbon taxes are so unpopular in the USA that in 2009-2010 Congress which had a filibuster proof Democrat majority in the Senate & 30+ majority in the House they couldn’t pass BHO’s carbon tax. Many polls have ask American’s about taxing energy usage to fight climate change. The results have been high percentages supporting fighting it; however, when an annualized household price tag is added the acceptable price is less than $5 per month.
Energy taxes aren’t very popular in Macron’s France either. When they significantly increased already high fuel taxes cities were paralyzed by violent street protests that lasted for months.
The last election was fought on climate change by Bill Shorten, and lost. That was the real opinion poll. And, the stranded assets you are lying about are still delivering more than 85% of Australian electricity production.
Oh, how do opinion polls compare to elections? Australia had it’s opportunity to do something about coal at the last election 18 months ago but we voted in a government that supported coal. The Prime Minister elect said “I am here for the aspirations of the quiet Australians”.
Climate Think Tank…. there’s an anomaly straight up !!!
Thanks, another bullsh!t phrase for my Climate Bullsh!t Bingo list, which is now over 3 pages.
1. There is no climate crisis. The climate change that we have been experiencing is very small and is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Mankind does not have the power to stop the climate from changing. Mankind includes Australia.
2. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. We do not know what the optimum climate is let alone how to obtain it. But even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue unabated because they are part of the current climate. There is nothing that Australia can do to change this. It is all a matter of science.
3. For those who believe in the radiametric greenhouse effect, the primary greenhouse gas is H2O and not CO2. Molecule per molecule, H2O is a stronger H2O absorber than CO2 and on average there is roughly 50 times more H2O in the atmosphere than is CO2. The producers of biofuels are doing nothing to reduce H2O emissions. Their slight reduction in CO2 emissions over a very long time span cannot possible have any effect on the overall radiant greenhouse effect if it exists and hence no effect on climate. Most of the H2O emitted into our atmosphere is emitted by the oceans and other bodies in the world. Australia does not have the power to alter this. Australia is already too dry.
4. The AGW conjecture depends upon the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere caused by trace gases with LWIR absorption bands. Such a radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere, or anywhere else in the solar system. The radiant greenhouse effect is nothing but science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction as well. This is all a matter of science and Australia does not have the power to change science.
5. So by burning wood in Denmark, the Earth’s climate has been saved so no one need worry about climate change any more. The IPCC should hence be disbanded. Thank you Denmark. In terms of climate change, there is nothing that Australia can do to alter it.
‘There is no climate crisis. The climate change that we have been experiencing is very small and is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control.’
Yes there IS a climate crisis and the prime driver of the climate change causing it is human derived CO2, operating on top of natural/historical climate drivers.
” the prime driver of the climate change causing it is human derived CO2,”
ROFLMAO.. we should change your name to grimm…. they told FAIRY-TALES as well.
YOU know that statement is complete and utter scientifically unsupportable BS..
You are LYING through your teeth. Mindless cultist chanting IS NOT EVIDENCE.
You know you have absolutely ZERO-EVIDENCE for making such GARBAGE statements
Try again to answer the questions, poor little addled-brain loser.
Stop being a complete and utter COWARD. !
1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?
2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be scientifically proven to be of human causation?
But there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. For example look at the chart that Al Gore presented in his movie showing CO2 and temperature over the past 650,000 years. Al Gore presented it as evidence that CO2 operates as a temperature control knob. But if one looks at the data in higher temporal resolution it is clear that CO2 follows temperature and not the other way around. It is clear from the data the higher temperatures cause more CO2 to enter the atmosphere and vice versa. The reason for this is that warmer oceans cannot hold as much CO2 as cooler oceans. Al Gore includes on his chart today”s CO2 levels and it is apparent that such relatively high levels have not caused temperatures to rise accordingly. Al Gore’s chart actually shows that CO2 has no effect on climate.
Initial radiametric calculations made decades ago came up with a value of 1.2 degrees C for the climate sensitivity of CO2 not including feedbacks. A Japanese researcher pointed out that these initial calculations failed to include that a doubling of CO2 will cause a slight decrease in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere which is a cooling effect and reduces the climate sensitivity of CO2 by more than a factor of 20 from 1.2 to .06 degrees C which is trivial and too small to measure.
Then there is the issue of feedbacks. According to the AGW conjecture, CO2 based warming will cause more H2O to enter the atmosphere. H2O is also a so called greenhouse gas and molecule per molecule absorbs more IR than does CO2. The additional H2O will cause more warming which will cause even more H2O to enter the atmosphere causing even more warming and so forth. What the AGW conjecture ignores is that besides being the primary greenhouse gas, H2O is a primary coolant in the Earth’s atmosphere moving heat energy from the Earth’s surface which mostly involves H2O in some form, to where clouds form via the heat of vaporization. The overall cooling effect of H2O is evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate in the troposphere is significantly than the dry lapse rate. So that instead of providing positive feedback, H2O provides negative feedback driving any warming that CO2 might provide to zero. Hence in terms of the physics to the Earth’s atmosphere, the climate sensitivity of CO2 is essentially zero.
Beware solar water heaters – 5 years ago there were rusting hulks on roofs everywhere, your turn will come!
The report is so slimy it oozes City-white-supremacist woke-speak.
I thot South Australia was the ” [failing/bad/crazy] example” for the world in green energy. Reading Jo’s blog. Have they straightened all that out now?
I think they installed some temporary diesel generators, they only need them until the magic happens.
Between the big diesel generators, billion $ interconnectors to states that actually generate power and shuttering their industry, they only need to have blackouts occasionally. Like those long, hot summer evenings when there’s neither solar nor wind power being generated.
The so-called ‘Climate Transparency’ group need to check their ‘facts’ first, because if they did, they would find the science underlying the way greenhouse gasses actually operate in the real world would make it clear that carbon dioxide cannot possibly be the ‘principle driver of the current warming period’ as assumed by the IPCC and its naive, gullible, agenda driven adherents.
They may continue to ignore the facts, but that can never change them and the real ‘truth’ will ultimately be accepted.
Water vapour is acknowledged as overwhelmingly the major greenhouse gas both in its broad activity spectrum of operation within the electro-magnetic radiation (EMR) span of Infrared (IR) radiation emitted from Earth, and in its very much higher atmospheric concentration.
Carbon dioxide on the other hand only effectively operates at a spike centred at 14.9um, an area also partially covered by water vapour. This severely limits any additional warming effect from carbon dioxide as in most cases this spectrum area is already saturated.
On top of that, according to the IPCC’s own AR5 scientific report, mankind’s total contribution to increasing atmospheric CO2 is only 4.3%. 95.7% of the increase if from well explained natural causes, in particular from the slowly warming oceans (Henry’s Law).
Runaway climate change from anthropogenic carbon dioxide is an impossibility on Earth, but the benefits from increasing this essential for all life as we know it gas, carbon dioxide, are absolutely enormous, but these are strangely, deceptively, completely ignored by this ilk.
The Australian Government is cautiously aware of the fact that ‘something is just not right’ about the ‘climate change’ claims, but believe they need to carefully balance their political actions on this issue with public perceptions, if they are to be returned to government at the next election.
It is just a pity that they have never done their proper due-diligence on this matter, because if they did, they could then speak with confidence and authority and adopt policies that are clearly in the best interests of their constituents.
I can’t be bothered correcting your zombie myths, maybe someone else will.
“Ian McClintock November 19, 2020 at 3:55 pm
Runaway climate change from anthropogenic carbon dioxide is an impossibility on Earth…”
Myth or truth Loydo?
You mean you CAN’T argue against the facts , can you petal….. so go off in a huff.. so funny !
You certainly can’t be bothered even trying to support YOUR zombie myths
How about you try.. just once.. everybody needs a good laugh 😁
1… Do you have any empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2?
2… In what ways has the global climate changed in the last 50 years , that can be scientifically proven to be of human causation?
Come on , mouthy malodorous little twit.
What part of Ian’s post have you actually got a scientific argument against?
We are all waiting for you to fall flat on your face in your own BS .. as always.
“Ian McClintock November 19, 2020 at 3:55 pm
Runaway climate change from anthropogenic carbon dioxide is an impossibility on Earth…”
Myth or truth?
Go Aus! But I have to admit I’m confused, from other reading I have done the Aussies are tearing down coal plants etc. I guess it’s never enough for the cult of green until you destroy yourself.
All proof that it never was about climate.
A few outliers have torn down coal plants, then suffered insane energy prices and grid instability. Its good to have a few prominent examples of what not to do.
You’re talking about South Australia again, which made North Korea look modern and advanced.
The South Australia government says it expects the state will be “net” 100 per cent renewables by 2030 and are aiming for 300%, ie an exporter. How backward thinking of them, so last century. Stoopid, greentard lefties, wait, the conservatives are in power.
https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/10/26/energy-experts-back-sa-renewable-target/
So they want to GIVE AWAY their erratic wind energy ….
….. or most likely, other states with ask for payment to take it.
You seriously remain gullibly CLUELESS, loony-Loy
AGW is a total joke as many more in OZ are starting to realize and really couldn’t give a S – – t what the rest of the world thinks,
If (IF!) co2 causes ANY WARMING AT ALL and if (IF!) co2 caused ALL the modern warming….. AU contribution to global emissions is 1.3% . So 1.3% of one degree over 100 years = 0.013 degrees C over 100 years.
IPPC is 90% (wow!) confident that humans caused ”most” of the warming. Let’s say 80% of it = 0.01 degrees C.
0.01 divided x 10 = 0.001 per decade
So let’s say AU achieves 50% reduction of that in 30 years (extremely unlikely) Our potential contribution to temperature reduction would be 0.0005 degrees in 3 decades!
ONE TWO THOUSANDths OF ONE DEGREE C.!!!
I think the maths is right but anyway….
What the hell have we been waiting for!!!!!!!!
Yep, the same bs argument applies to about 190 countries. But if you add them all up they emit almost as much as China and the US combined.
Its a particularly vacuous argument for Australians to make, being amongst the highest per person emitters and the worlds biggest by far coal exporter. I know, I know, that’s just a coincidence.
GREAT NEWS hey Loy’d’oh !
CO2 is MUCH NEEDED in the atmosphere because it provide one of the 3 main ingredients for ALL LIFE ON EARTH.
And as you keep proving, there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that it causes any warming.
Even if by some FANTASY it did, current global temperatures are only a small bump above the COLDEST period in 10,000 years, so a bit more warming, if we are FORTUNATE enough to get it, would be a real boon from countries now coping with excessive cold.
“the worlds biggest by far coal exporter”
NO, your ignorance is showing AS ALWAYS. !!
Indonesia is the world greatest exporter of coal.
https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=coal&graph=exports&display=rank
https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-information-overview
Is you constantly being PROVABLY WRONG, caused by ignorance, incompetence or LYING, loy ??
Your data is from 2013. Last year Australia’s exports almost doubled Indonesia’s.
http://www.worldstopexports.com/coal-exports-country/
I think you owe me an apology.
Loydo, do you know why Australia sends all that coal to China?
Because without it, it would not be possible to build your precious renewables.
South Australia’s energy is up there with the most expensive in the world. So much for your cheap energy. In regard to them exporting energy, they have so much in the way of renewables that they have to offload the excess sometimes. Much like Germany does when they have periods of windy weather. Now you may think that this ‘export’ of energy is a positive thing, but the thing is, it presents problems for the people they’re offloading it to. Places like South Australia, California and Germany actually pay their neighbours to take it off their hands. It is unstable! During days of heavy clouds of when the wind doesn’t blow, these same worshippers of renewables pay a premium price to prop up the supply, or they import it from their neighbours, again for a high premium.
We, here in the Central West of NSW have renewables infrastructure being built around us at an incredible rate. We have had five blackouts this year Loydo. We depend on electricity to operate the water pumps to supply the house with water. No power, no water.
They are proposing a 400mw solar installation 7 kilometres from our home. 1,750 hectares of agricultural land will be bulldozed, native and farm animals displaced and all vegetation removed.
There will be 900,000 solar panels installed with no plans for future disposal or land restoration. It isn’t even clear who will be responsible for this.
Firefighters cannot fight a solar fire, full stop. The damaged panels present risk of electrocution. They have also been warned of the risk of toxic smoke. The best way to fight such fires is from the air. We don’t have any water bombers near us Loydo. The irony is that they don’t even talk about this to the public, the people living near this infrastructure. What do you think people in the country do in the event of a grassfire? They try to put it out! They do not know the risks. If panels aren’t cleaned when necessary, they develop hotspots, they catch fire.
Renewable energy is the most dirty of all forms of power production. It requires ten times the resources in regard to raw materials necessary to manufacture them. Processing of these materials is highly toxic. They still have not worked out how to dispose of this waste.
Humanitarian issues are simply being ignored. The pressure on developing nations due to the roll-out of renewables is overwhelming.
Renewables are largely not being recycled. What a wonderful legacy we leave future generations.
You don’t have a clue Loydo.
WRONG and LYING again little worm
ANYONE can check the second link , under trade and see that it is using 2019 data
Also in the large graph about half way down, Indonesia is ABOVE Australia in 2019
Your INCOMPETENCE shines through YET AGAIN !!!
Your ignorant link is in money terms..
Go searching for that apology that YOU owe ME
WAITING !!!!!!
In terms of actual amount, Indonesia is well ahead.
“Your data is from 2013”
Utter and complete BS.. and you really have done a face plant your own BS this time loy.
The Index Mundi data is also 2019 data.. go back to the home page and you see the ©2020 at the bottom, and CV-19 data at the top.
Great to see you not caring just how much you EXPOSE YOUR IGNORANCE. !!
Now off you slither, and wipe that BS of yours off your face !!
Loydo, according to the International Energy Agency, Indonesia is the #1 coal exporter in the world and has been since 2017 and the lead exporter for the last decade.
https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-information-overview
Kev ..
You have to realise.. FACTS mean absolutely NOTHING to Loy.
He has his/her own little fantasy facts,
…. and nothing even close to reality can evah be allowed to intrude
“Indonesia exported the most, and also showed the highest growth, adding 21 Mt to the previous year figure.”
from
https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-information-overview July 2020
”the worlds biggest by far coal exporter.”….
….to countries with coal fired power plants who need coal and will GET coal wherever they can.
No no no. You don’t get to use that tired old chestnut of an ”argument”
“without the need for government targets and other forms of coercion”.
You forgot subsidies. Without the gigantic direct subsidies and indirect (the Renewable Energy Target), nobody would put a solar panel up.
In April 1954 the Sydney Morning Herald reported:
‘Expert Believes Our Weather Is Changing.
THE results of climatic studies by an Australian physicist, Mr. E. L. Deacon of the Section of
Meteorological Physics C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne support the view, widely held overseas, that world weather conditions are changing.
Australian summers, Mr. Deacon says, are becoming wetter and somewhat cooler, and the winters drier than they were around about the turn of the century.
These conclusions are based on an investigation of temperature, rainfall, and air pressure trends in Australia during two 30-year periods, from 1881 to 1910 and’ from 1911 to 1940 …’ (Trove: SMH 04 May 1954).
Later the same month:
‘Expert Believes Our Weather Is Changing.
… He [Mr Deacon] studied the mean daily maximum temperatures, in summertime, of 14 inland towns which had sufficiently complete temperature records extending back to 1881. His report says:”All these localities show lower mean summer maximum temperatures in the period 1911 1940, and the average fall of 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit [~1.5C] …”‘ (Trove: SMH Mon 19 Apr 1954).
The BoM supposed temperature record starts in 1910.
and yet Australia has the highest per capita solar capacity, beating even Germany… australians are voting with their rooftops.
Handy summary from Wikipedia:
“Solar power in Australia is a fast growing industry. As of September 2020, Australia’s over 2.56 million solar PV installations had a combined capacity of 18,526 MW photovoltaic (PV) solar power, of which at least 4,426 MW were installed in the preceding 12 months. In 2019, 59 solar PV projects with a combined capacity of 2,881 MW were either under construction, constructed or due to start construction having reached financial closure. Solar accounted for 5.2% (or 11.7 TWh) of Australia’s total electrical energy production (227.8 TWh) in 2018.
The sudden rise in Solar PV installations in Australia since 2018 dramatically propelled the country from being considered a relative laggard to a strong contender in Solar PV development by mid 2019. With an installed photovoltaic capacity of 16.3 GW at the end of 2019, Australia has the highest per capita solar capacity at 600 watts per capita, overtaking Germany with 580 watts per capita.”
and I note the continued deployment of grid scale batteries, saving money for customers and providing grid stability.
griff.. currently Solar on the whole of the East Coast NEM is ZERO !!!!
Nada , NOTHING !!!!
And you again show just how gullible and CLUELESS you are about grid scale batteries.
You ignorance is hilarious.. even more so that you seem totally incapable of actually LEARNING anything related to reality !!
5 % …… WHOOPY DOOO !!!
“Australia has the highest per capita solar capacity at 600 watts per capita”
So you agree that those dumb alarmist non-think-tanks are totally wrong about Australian renewable energy .
Thanks, Now take your BS covered foot out of your mouth.
Did you know that Queensland is currently using 94% Coal and Gas
NSW is 80% Coal and Gas. with some 13% coming from the Hydro scheme.
And of course the BROWN COAL has been sitting on a dead straight line all day.. covering a rock steady 3.2GWh something wind and solar could never do in their wildest dreams.
Victoria had to use some gas for this afternoon’s peak as the Solar died and there was precious little wind.
Stop taking those wacko tablets , griff, and try to get at least a tiny grip on REALITY.
The real humor with Australia solar panel installations is most of it useless and saves us nothing in emissions because it occurs at wrong times.
The owners of the SA “battery” are making a MOTZA from stabilising the grid
(while not actually providing any electricity at all.)
So who do you think pays for that…. someone from one of your fairy-tales ???
Of course , if it wasn’t for all the ERRATIC, UNRELIABLE supplies on the SA grid (most costly electricity in Australia) that VERY EXPENSIVE non-provider would not be needed.
Hi Andy… good to see that you have somewhere to vent
“griff November 20, 2020 at 12:33 am
and I note the continued deployment of grid scale batteries, saving money for customers and providing grid stability.”
You don’t pay for power in Australia do you Griff? I ask this because, as I live in Australia, the only way I can save on my power bills is to not use any.
“griff November 20, 2020 at 12:33 am
and yet Australia has the highest per capita solar capacity, beating even Germany… australians are voting with their rooftops.”
That may be true however, it’s the people who can’t install solar, for whatever reason, that are subsidising the “…australians are voting with their rooftops…”. Again Griff, you comment on subjects you know nothing about.
”and yet Australia has the highest per capita solar capacity, beating even Germany… australians are voting with their rooftops.”
They’re not ”voting” at all. If they choose solar it’s usually a desperate attempt to get a handle on skyrocketing power prices due to lack of investment in new plants by the coal companies due to insane green policies which tear them down.
NOTHING TO DO WITH A PREFERENCE FOR SOLAR.
“Climate think tank”? Surely an oxymoron?
From over a decade ago- Oz is just a big CO2 sink. Even bigger if you add in our economic zone seas.
Australian carbon emissions absorbed by our landmass ?
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=212