Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Australian Resources Minister Keith Pitt predicts global demand for Aussie coal will remain strong “long into the future”.
Australia’s Resources Minister Keith Pitt dismisses UN chief’s climate change statement
With Australia isolated on climate change, Resources Minister Keith Pitt has dismissed a global warming statement from the United Nations secretary-general.
Australia’s resources minister has castigated a climate change warning from the United Nations secretary-general as an inconsequential “grand statement”.
Antonio Guterres has warned the world is heading for a catastrophic temperature of rise of more than three degrees by the end of the century unless all countries declare climate emergencies.
…
Resources Minister Keith Pitt dismissed the climate warning from Mr Guterres.
“Grand statements are quite simple to make,” he told ABC radio on Monday.
“If they made a difference (Labor MPs) Mark Butler and Pat Conroy made that exact statement in the parliament many months ago and I don’t seem to recall it changing anything.
“It’s about outcomes, it’s about a plan, it’s about knowing where we’re going and what it will cost, and it’s about delivery.”
…
Mr Pitt is confident strong global demand for Australian coal will continue long into the future.
He has requested a parliamentary inquiry into lenders and insurers blacklisting companies linked to coal and gas producers.
…
Read more: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australia-s-resources-minister-keith-pitt-dismisses-un-chief-s-climate-change-statement
Vote in enough politicians with the balls to stand up to the climate bullies, and the climate panic will be a thing of the past.
Three Cheers for Australian Resources Minister Keith Pitt : Climate Hero.
With the “Normalization” (Yuri Bezmenov) comes hard times. My wild guess is that coal will return back into the individual’s heating operators in not so distant future.
Add to that, that many new coal thermal plants are being build. A trend that may, hopefully, also come to the African countries to a larger extend, as the only viable option to modernize Africa.
Although Charles Schwab and Joseph Biden have other ideas, there are still large countries on the upraise, who worship quality of life and productivity.
Coal is easy to ship to any place in the world and there is enough of it for a long time into the future.
But, face mask on when you handle coal 🙂
ACCC should be investigating any company boycotting another company on grounds of not meeting some perceived moral yet unscientific and unqualified demands in relation to climate change action. Boycotting companies based on some inaccurate probabilistic modelling where quantitation of human attribution remains uncertain is akin to thuggery of a voodoo religious nature. Where’s the ACCC on this matter?
China will keep being Aussie coal, Just watch. They have to power their 200 coal fired plants somehow.
China has 1077 operating coal fired power plants with 231 more under construction.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kXtAw6QvhE14_KRn5lnGoVPsHN3fDZHVMlvz_s_ch1w/edit#gid=165011444
Eric
Slightly off topic, but can you explain this article?
Australian government subsidising aluminium smelter
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/australia-rescues-alcoa-portland-smelter-in-bid-to-shore-up-power-grid-2020-12-13
Thanks in advance
Wow, completely nuts.
not if we want to keep some industry here and aluminiums important
theyve had a few nasty shutdowns n lost a lot of money and had damages due to smelt in progress being ceased suddenly with ensuing set metals messess
so theyre doing deals
dipshit andrews mighta woke to the fact he cant afford to lose alcoa
though hes lost a motza of other biz and the belt n rd deals done SFA to boost vic trade at all
whoops
Oz, this cash underwrites the regional government idiocy with energy production. Surely you don’t ‘speak up’ to condone this. If that is the state of the grid, you are destined to lose a plant like this anyway. All of you can speak up and vite for a new government that will fix this greeny children’s playground.
They mention ‘losing’ a coal fired plant. Is this the one that the operator could no longer afford to operate as backup to ruinables so iffered it to the gov for $1.00 which was turned down!!
Another point is that if Alcoa shuts down, there will be too much electricity at times of high wind
Because of its high energy requirements, Alcoa acts as a sort of sponge helping to keep the grid balanced.
Thanks fred
That’s what I’m trying do understand.
Does this mean wind energy providers don’t get paid?
Are you saying it’s a energy sponge or financial/contract sponge or both?
“Are you saying it’s a energy sponge or financial/contract sponge or both?”
Both, I would say.. They give “regularity of demand” using so much electricity that smaller urban fluctuations are basically buried as noise.
Without that massive load, balancing the grid would be a lot more difficult.
Hadn’t considered it from a financial position, but having a guaranteed revenue stream never hurts.
Wind seems to always get paid, especially if they are asked to throttle their output.
If coal got the same deal, being paid when asked to turn down their output, the cost would be very significant !
With the fraudulent election of Biden in the US, it seems like Australia and Brazil will be the West’s remaining stalwards of sanity against the anti-scientific nonsense spouted by the “climate emergency” cabal. May they hold the torch up high against such leftist fascists.
Ric December 15, 2020 at 3:07 am
With the fraudulent election of Biden in the US, it seems like Australia and Brazil will be the West’s remaining stalwards of sanity against the anti-scientific nonsense spouted by the “climate emergency” cabal. May they hold the torch up high against such leftist fascists.
Unfortunately, you are probably quite correct. Democrats now know that they can get away with stuffing the ballot box big time. We can probably look forward to never ending Democrat majority in both houses from here on out. Same for state governments. There’s not a lot conservative Republicans can do about it short of the unthinkable.
This is really off topic, so I will keep it short. In 2018, something like 691,000 California residents moved to another state. If the ‘purge’ removes non-voting citizens after missing 3 general elections, that could mean 6 years of emigrated voters still on the rolls. Probably not a problem if ballots are only mailed to those who request them. But this year they were mailed to everyone on the list.
I got one for my son-in-law, who currently lives in Ithaca, New York. I could have filled it in and mailed it with near zero chance of getting caught. With likely over a million ballots mailed to non-residents, there is no way of knowing how much cheating there was. Without such knowledge one cannot make a case for fraud. I would characterize the voting as ‘insecure.’ And those who are appropriately concerned about future election security are not imbeciles.
When the thinkable no longer works, the unthinkable is all that is left.
Over a four-year period, the international leftist media was able to (semi) destroy one man, President Trump. In the meantime, anti-leftist politicians were able to make gains at local and national levels. Get a grip, everybody. Representative democracy always wins. The average person is not stupid.
Believers in the “fraudulent election” are imbeciles, but the rest of your statement is true. Pssst…the word is “stalwarts”.
I agree with Bruce. There was no widespread fraud, not enough to change the election. Biden’s the lawful president, and dark theories to the contrary only make us seem anti-democracy. Let’s concentrate instead on defeating the idiotic climate change initiatives we’re sure to see.
Dave, How do you and Bruce know this? It seems to be something that is unknowable at the present time.
“Those with nothing to hide, hide nothing” is an apt phrase. Tell us why so many states refused forensic analysis of their voting systems. Anyone parroting the MSM narrative of “no fraud” may have been fooled and if they would rather go on without finding out they deserve the consequences.
markl, Exactly. People on this site like to taut their bone fides as truth seekers and skeptics. But the statement that anyone who could believe in voter fraud is an “imbecile” is simply an unscientific, non-skeptical ex cathedra claim. Just as an example is the Illinois governor’s race in November 1982, where it was estimated that 10% of 1,000,000 votes in the City of Chicago were fraudulent. The Federal prosecutors obtained 26 convictions. From a 2016 Salon article about corruption Chicago style, we find the following about the Federal prosecutor….
“…Testifying before Congress later that year, Webb was asked to explain why the vast majority of cases he prosecuted were against campaign workers, election officials, and precinct captains. It’s “very simple,” he said. “We have discovered that those [officials] are the most culpable people in connection with the vote fraud that occurs on Election Day…”
Much of the alleged fraud in Detroit, Philly, Pittsburg this year are exactly like these long established frauds. Then there is the uncomfortable fact that any election involving machines and data using firmware and the internet are extremely difficult to secure.
“I agree with Bruce. There was no widespread fraud, not enough to change the election.”
I will agree that not enough evidence has been presented to change the election. That’s not to say there isn’t that evidence, but it is not available to the public. I couldn’t sit here and make a case that Trump has been cheated out of the election because I don’t have enough evidence to make such a case.
The video of election workers apparently putting the same ballots through a counting machine numerous times looks highly suspicious, but there is not enough information available publicly that can prove we actually saw illegal activity, and even if it was, there is not enough evidence to know whether this particular vote count would swing the election to Trump.
The same holds for all the contested States. I listened to an interview with Rudi Guiliani the other day and he told me to go to defendtherepublic.org to get all the evidence, but I haven’t had time to dig into it. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the public are in the dark as to what went on in the election. The public case for the election being stolen has not been made.
But Trump’s lawyers still say they have the evidence but what they are having a hard time getting is a judge to listen to the case. All thse judges want to pass on this decision. They don’t want to be the one to be accused of overturning the election.
So that leaves the State Legislatures. If the Trump Team can demonstrate enough corruption in their various elections, enough to make the Republican legislators take action, then it is still possible for Trump to win.
So, it’s not over, but it’s getting close. When Trump exhausts all his legal avenues, then it will be over. January 20, 2021, is the deadline day, not Dec. 14.
Then if Trump loses, Biden can be president for half the American population, and Trump can be president for the other half.
Of course I know it is “stalwarts”; so there is no need to play the snarky one here – have you ever heard of typos, particularly in a commenting system that allows no editing after posting?
And let me state this for the record: the only imbeciles are those who think the US elections were clean and devoid of fraudulent ballots.
Look, people: The will of the American people as to President Trump has been expressed in the 2020 general elections. I disagree with their majority opinion, but nit picking about voting irregularities is not going to change anything. Just as in 2016 with Trump, Biden is President no matter how much many of us object. Our only course is to strenuously object to the Leftist onslaught. RESIST!
“Just as in 2016 with Trump, Biden is President no matter how much many of us object.”
Yes, *after* all legal avenues have been exhausted. At this moment, they have not all been exhausted.
Please explain how a vote counting process results in negative votes, that causes blocks of votes to instantly disappear from candidate A and be added to candidate B.
What is your plausible explanation for poll watchers being prevented from seeing how mail-in ballots were handled? If everything was above board and transparent, why the need for concealment?
The “fraudulent election” Belief is similar in nature to the 9/11 Truthers. It has no basis in fact, only wild speculation driven by emotionalism. And yes, those who Believe that crap are in fact imbeciles.
These events were widespread regardless of anyone’s beliefs, and constitute fraud with coverup.
And you were unable to provide any rational explanations.
Are you prepared to provide any evidence, or just insults?
https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/11/what-youve-been-asking-for-a-fairly-complete-list-of-some-of-the-most-significant-claims-of-2020-election-miscounts-errors-or-fraud/
Frayed knot – Australia has near bipartisan support for weather dependent power generation. There is some recognition that the lights need to stay on and gas gets the job of doing that.
Very unlikely Australia will build another coal power station.
Australia will be exporting thermal coal for a long time and met coal probably for as long as it can be found.
It takes a lot of met coal and iron ore to make just one wind turbine. Given the world needs a few million of them then their ongoing replacement it is more likely met coal and iron ore will run out before the thermal coal.
Just out of curiosity. What does a sack of coal currently cost in the US?
When I toured through the US in 1982 and 1983, I believe a sack of coal costed around $0.50 in Arizona. I may be wrong, but it was cheaper than unleaded gas.
Here on the east coast of the US, I used to able to buy a sack of coal for about $4.00 from a small store on the corner in the late 1980’s A lot of houses in my neighborhood have coal burning fireplaces because they were constructed in the early 1900’s. But now the store is gone and no one sells sacks of coal.
If only, if only we had someone of that calibre in blighty.
We have 650 climate eunuchs all eager to outdo each other’s virtue signalling. And in the other place there are crazies like Lord Deben.
Sounds encouraging. We’ll see what Dominion Voting has to say about that in the next general election.
I hope everyone remembers Whitlam and the “palace letters”? This June?
Stepping out of the Chatham House line does not amuse Buckingham.
What palace letters may be right now circulating, pray tell?
And after all Dominion Voting software from Smartmatic is Lord Malloch-Brown’s sandbox, who just now took over Soros’ outfit. The British House of Lords internal policy document could not tolerate a second Trump Admin. But in Australia’s case a government can simply be dismissed.
China should be paying a premium for any goods purchased from Australia as they are an “unreliable” and “erratic” buyer.
According to “carbon” roolz, if you ship the coal to be burned elsewhere, it doesn’t count towards your own “carbon emissions”. Convenient, that.
“Bruce Cobb December 15, 2020 at 5:06 am”
There is a drive by the scientifically illiterate, here in Australia at least, to count the estimated emissions of fossil fuels mined in Australia, exported and burnt in other countries, in Australian estimates for emissions.
So not only has Australia exported most of it’s industry, it plans to export the emissions and charge Australians for it.
Thank goodness we have a politician with the courage to speak out about the climate alarmism spouted by the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres in his continuing attempt to achieve One World Government run by non-other that Antonio Guterres.
It has been known for years that climate data shows changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration lagging temperature changes over time scales ranging from a few months to millennia. Mathematical analysis of modern data reveals that temperature correlates with the rate of generation of CO2 whereby local maxima in the temperature correspond to maxima in the rate of generation of CO2 which, of mathematical necessity, must precede the associated maxima in the CO2 concentration. Consequently maxima in the CO2 concentration always follow after temperature maxima.
As a result, CO2 cannot have caused global warming because it is impossible for the later CO2 change to be a cause of the earlier temperature change.
It also explains the situation over the past century whereby the CO2 concentration has been continually increasing. The temperature range has been such that the CO2 rate of generation has always been positive. This means that the future CO2 level will not stop increasing until the ambient temperature falls to the critical level at which the rate of CO2 generation is zero. The next Ice Age?
The lack of any warming is confirmed by a knowledge of the absorption spectrum for CO2. Planck’s law shows that for the radiation emitted from the Earth’s surface at the average temperature of 15 degrees Celsius, 99% of the absorbed photons that are absorbed by CO2 are in the 15 micron wavelength band. This represents the peak of radiation that would be emitted from the ice and snow in Antarctica on the odd occasions when the temperature falls to -80 degrees Celsius. That definitely cannot warm the rest of the Earth as it is already hotter than -80 deg.C.
Furthermore, at the current CO2 concentration, 413.62 ppm on 10 December, there are 166,000,000 CO2 molecules in the adjoining atmosphere for every photon emitted from a 15 deg.C Earth surface that could be absorbed by that CO2. Consequently all of the radiation that can be absorbed is fully absorbed within a few hundred metres of the surface. Increasing or decreasing the CO2 concentration will make no difference to the climate but merely decrease or increase the distance over which complete absorption takes place.
There is no climate emergency.
There is no climate emergency.
How many fingers am I holding up,Winston?
Bevan, you have not mentioned the IR leaving through the IR “window”.
Anyway, if the CO2 warming meme was not taught in schools, (instead that sunlight causes evaporation that in turn causes clouds, and cloud cover controls the Albedo and thus the temperature of the planet), we wouldn’t be in the situation of having literally thousands of innumerates marching in the streets because they’ve been told that water vapor will amplify the CO2 warming by a factor of 3….instead of decreasing it by a factor of 3 because of cloud cover/albedo response to a degree of warming……with equally innumerate politicians seeing a vote smuckering opportunity.
“DMacKenzie December 15, 2020 at 7:54 am
…because they’ve been told that water vapor will amplify the CO2 warming by a factor of 3…”
They have been told CO2, and only CO2 emission from human activity, does the amplifying. My question is given IR absorption bands for CO2 are largely saturated, where does the extra energy come from for amplification (Runaway GHE)?
Aluminum smelting is an electrochemical process. Alcoa will reduce its power consumption on critical hot days to avoid overloading the grid, thus reducing aluminum output. The state will simply compensate Alcoa for the lost profits from the turndown.
Aluminum smelters are baseload power consumers, essentially constant 24/7. Shutting down Alcoa would likely lead to the closing of a baseload power plant and that would reduce grid stability.
My vote is for Minister Keith Pitt ! 🙂