Claim: Green Loans and Solar Panels Could Save Households Money

Aussie Home Energy Claim
Aussie Home Energy Claim (source SMH)

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Australia’s “climate genius” Seth Griffith explains how households could all be powered by government financed solar with an EV in the garage by 2024.

Clean energy cash splash would cut household bills $4200 by 2035

By Nick O’Malley and Mike Foley
October 5, 2021 — 5.00am

Australian households would save $4200 on their energy bills by 2035 if governments helped them add solar power and batteries, replace gas cooking and heating appliances and purchase electric vehicles.

The subsidies would cost around $12 billion in the earlier years of such a scheme, but save $300 billion in household energy costs and help reduce the nation’s domestic greenhouse gas emissions by about a third, according to analysis by the energy non-profit group, Rewiring Australia.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg last month labelled economic risk as the primary motivation for climate action and put it front and centre of the next federal election, due by May next year.

“Australia has a lot at stake. We cannot run the risk that markets falsely assume we are not transitioning in line with the rest of the world,” Mr Frydenberg said.

If governments subsidised early uptake, the savings would soon outweigh the costs, the analysis shows.

Read more:

Given there are around 8.3 million households in Australia, the $12 billion subsidy quoted by SMH only stretches to $1445 / household. Not nearly enough to subsidise a full solar conversion and EV purchase. And a lot of those households are high-rise apartments, so not a lot of space for the solar panels.

Even if you have the roof space, the energy budget is wafer thin.

I have a friend who lives in a very sunny part of Queensland, whose very large house and garage roof area is covered with solar panels. He has a big battery and an EV. Not because he believes we are experiencing a climate crisis, all this is because he doesn’t trust the government’s ability to run the country or competently provide basic services. He also collects rainwater and grows his own food.

He can *just* about run everything off the solar, except 2-3 times per year when he has to switch on the grid supply. No home heating or cooling, other than a few fans, and this only works when he limits driving to 5-10 miles per day in his EV.

Total cost of all this (including a cheap low range EV) was around AUD $65,000. Scaling this out to every house in Australia, $65k x 8.3 million households = $539 billion.

Of course this setup wouldn’t work for most people. There is nothing average about my friend’s house or his solar setup.

The bit Seth left out, is that even if you have a decent roof space, staying within the energy budget of the solar energy you can collect from an average roof would for most people require some drastic lifestyle changes. Especially if they do not live in a sunny part of a sunny state like Queensland, which experiences mild winters and good sunlight pretty much all year round.

If a person runs an energy intensive home business side hustle, say doing some automobile repairs and arc welding, they would be well and truly stuffed. Same for people who live in Australia’s densely populated cold climate states, which barely see the sun in winter.

There is an additional problem. My friend’s solar panels need a regular wash, to keep them operating at peak efficiency. Above all else Australia is a dusty place, a land of vast deserts and sweeping plains. A lot of dust from our arid interior gets carried and deposited on more populated regions, when the wind blows across our drylands. Australia has enough water for most people to live comfortable lives – but not if every household starts using hundreds of litres per week of additional water, to keep their solar panels clean.

5 14 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
October 7, 2021 6:07 pm

Being unwilling to do math, or make realistic assumptions in one’s plans, seems to be a requirement for a green.

Reply to  Tom Halla
October 7, 2021 6:25 pm

Perhaps the fact that they define themselves by a single monochromatic light in a world of a much wider spectrum says it all.

Reply to  Kalsel3294
October 7, 2021 10:29 pm

It really just applies to how easy it is to fool them. They’re really green.

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  Kalsel3294
October 8, 2021 5:20 am

Yeah, and even the plants don’t like the color of the light so they reflect it.

Reply to  Tom Halla
October 8, 2021 6:52 am

It’s all statists, all the time. Aside from socialism destroying prices and not knowing how much resources to allocate where, there’s the old Pharaoh saying, “So let it be written, so let it be done” (or however Yul Brynner phrased it), the idea that merely passing a law as good as solves whatever problem was described in the legislation’s title.

Greens are just statists with a slightly different emphasis in the means to central planning utopia.

Louis Hunt
Reply to  Tom Halla
October 8, 2021 1:20 pm

The only thing worse than politicians who can’t tell the difference between fantasy and reality is the voter who can’t tell the difference either and readily votes for these snake oil salesmen to their own detriment.

Ron Long
October 7, 2021 6:19 pm

Math challenged, are we, in Ozzieland? Oregon has eliminated testing for math as a requirement for High School graduation, so they are undoubtedly producing a lot of future politicians

Mike Sexton
Reply to  Ron Long
October 7, 2021 7:54 pm

It’s not just math it’s everything

Gerald the Mole
Reply to  Mike Sexton
October 8, 2021 3:05 am

To quote John McCarthy\\: ” she who does not do arithmetic is doomed to talk rubbish.”

bill Johnston
Reply to  Gerald the Mole
October 8, 2021 6:21 am

I asked a young lady at a convenience store what 10% of 3 dollars was. Her reply was she didn’t know. “They didn’t teach us that.”

Reply to  bill Johnston
October 8, 2021 9:56 am

That is just so sad – couldn’t even muster up the energy to think about the question. I’m sure she was taught about percentages (my 9 year old is doing that now) but either she was at the back of the class picking her nose on that day when being taught %, or forgot over the years. But still, can’t do 10%!?

Reply to  Ron Long
October 8, 2021 2:56 am

Mathematics is ‘racist’. Here is a reading list prepared by the Mathematics Department of Bristol University. Read that and you’ll have no time left to study Mathematics.
Resources for staff

Resources for everyone

I hate to think of the consequences for medicine. 5, 10. 15, 20 percent of doctors must be BME? No matter what their academic qualifications?

October 7, 2021 6:22 pm

After the home insulation debacle of 2010 known affectionately as the Australian pink batt disaster no Australian government is going to go near such stupidity. It’s a greentard flapping his gums over something that will never happen.

Last edited 1 year ago by LdB
Patrick Peake
October 7, 2021 6:28 pm

I think that another missed point is that the cost of petrol in Australia includes a lot of tax. Already we are seeing states put a road tax on EVs. This will presumably increase because governments will still want the tax revenue to pay for roads and so on. So you cannot credit the full avoided cost of not using petrol because EVs are going to face very similar direct costs

Reply to  Patrick Peake
October 7, 2021 7:19 pm

“Fuel excise is a flat sales tax levied by the Australian Government on petrol and diesel bought at the bowser. The current rate is 42.7 cents in excise for every litre of fuel purchased. This rate is adjusted from time to time in line with inflation and is in addition to the GST.
Budget papers show Australian motorists will pay $49.3 billion in net fuel excise over the next four years. These papers also show that the equivalent of almost of all this, $46.8 billion, will be re-invested in land transport projects.”

Reply to  Dennis
October 7, 2021 8:13 pm

It should be scary for all taxpayers that no governments have said how they intend to replace the $billions in direct taxes they currently collect from gasoline & diesel pumps.

My prediction is that instead of “consumers pay”, it will be “everybody pays”.

Reply to  Mr.
October 7, 2021 9:27 pm

I believe that governments have done the math and intend to make up the revenue this way, Mr.
comment image

Reply to  Patrick Peake
October 7, 2021 8:00 pm

In France most of the price paid for unleaded is tax. (Also, tax on tax.)

So the political class disguised as the fifth power, the so called “journalists” (*) and “analysts”, instead of sayingas they should according to conventions used everywhere else (**) – that taxes on unleaded are above 100%, do divide the taxes by the total paid amount to get an amount of taxes in the 60% range.

(*) or “journalopes

(**) if political science is a thing, or can be a thing, or might possibly be a goal, you can’t make up conventions on the fly; if not, than the whole “studying political science” is a scam, and is to science what astrology is to astronomy; if so, the prestigious “Science Po” Parisian school is a fake school (fake as in fake bills) and each and every employee of that school has a fake employment (which is criminal)

Reply to  niceguy
October 8, 2021 6:59 am

Every country I know of with VAT includes taxes in the MSRP. By that standard, 60% tax rate is the correct number.

Reply to  Felix
October 8, 2021 10:07 am

niceguy said “the tax on unleaded” not VAT. He’s talking about the complete tax load, not just the final calculation.

So out of say, the $1.40CDN a litre I’m seeing now, 60% of that was tax, ie the fuel itself is 56¢ and so the effective tax rate would be 150% but you don’t see that because it’s buried in the price on the sign.

Just pretend you were buying a litre of gasoline at Dollarama – on the shelf it says 56¢. You take it to the cashier, she tallys it up, the register adds on 150% in taxes, and you get the final price of $1.40.

October 7, 2021 6:38 pm

The electricity bill for our terrace house in inner Sydney is about $600 per year, so the $4200 saving promised by Nick O’Malley and Mike Foley should reward us with a nice profit of $3,600 per annum in 2035. Also by then, the pigs will be flying overhead to give extra shade in summer.

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
October 7, 2021 10:27 pm

Our family of four, live in Melbourne.
Electricity bill $1200 pa
Gas bill $2000 pa
So saving of $4200 pa illogical

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
October 8, 2021 9:24 am

I think they wrote it wrong. It was $4200 savings for the entire country per year.

Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
October 8, 2021 9:30 pm

That much?

You may need to recalculate. It will probably not save the entire country even a penny.

Think of every cost or savings ever promised by politicians that you’ve known of over the years, and then recall the actual costs or savings after it was all said and done.

Yeah…. I thought so.

John in Oz
Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
October 8, 2021 5:37 pm

While his figure of $4,200 is probably a mite rubbery, he could be using not paying for fuel (presumably using an average distance travelled) plus the cost of recharging an EV.

We should not be using our current costs against his future dream as energy provision will be changed dramatically (no oil products, all electric).

Naturally, the cost of renewables will be lower in the future because……..unicorns and fairy dust.

Reply to  John in Oz
October 8, 2021 9:52 pm

Fairy Dust futures are UP!

Reply to  H.R.
October 8, 2021 10:27 pm

The futures are up for now, but look for fairy dust and unicorns to be slapped with a tax as well.

Charles Higley
October 7, 2021 7:01 pm

Draw a line following the middle latitude of the US. No one buying solar panels for their house will ever even break even is they live above that line. Canada is a total loss. There is nothing wrong with end users generating a bit of electricity and drawing less from the grid, but it has to be economically worthwhile or they are hurting themselves.

It is the stupid idea that they can construct a reliable energy supply from unreliable energy sources that makes such policies just stupid and pie-in-the-sky and a SCAM on the people.

Remember, the goal of politicians is not to beef up an energy sector that already has working companies that can do the job. They want to push new areas in which family and friends can benefit hugely from crony capitalism.

Reply to  Charles Higley
October 7, 2021 7:24 pm

I travel around and across Australia on different routes now that I am retired, in the mostly remote area country away from the coastal strip around it fuel supplies are from “Roadhouses” or service centres that offer multiple services often including accommodation and cafes.

All of them have diesel generators for electricity supply, there is no electricity grid.

Very few have solar panels mainly because of the high temperatures and dusty conditions.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Charles Higley
October 7, 2021 8:08 pm

Assuming your claim is true then most of Australia lies in the profitable zone. Dever is at
39N while Melbourne is at 37S (i.e. closer to the equator). Hobart is at 42S so a small price reduction in solar panels means that even there solar power would be profitable. Plus electricity prices in Australia are about twice that of the US which again means that solar panels make much better economic sense in Australia, even if you live in Hobart. In additional solar thermal hot water systems are also viable across most of Australia further reducing costs.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 7, 2021 8:50 pm

If your “profit” on any investment is at the whim of a government subsidy, you’re no more astute than bitcoin dabblers who are at the mercy of Elon Musk’s tweets.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Mr.
October 8, 2021 9:36 am

At least you can look at tulips and grow new ones every year. Bitcoin, not so much.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 7, 2021 9:03 pm

It’s nearly always raining in Tasmania, with occasional sunny days. The local joke here is that we have summer here between February 3rd and 6th.
Strangely enough, there are houses with solar panels. I think the main benefit they derive from the panels is as an extra layer of insulation on the roof.

bill Johnston
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
October 8, 2021 6:25 am

But they are self-cleaning.

Dave Freer
Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 8, 2021 12:06 am

Well, Izaak – I live on the 40S in Oz, and it was going to cost 12K to connect my remote place to the grid. I put together a nearly 12kilowatt solar set up ( a lot of panels) for about that -as I did it myself. Winter I have to run the generator every few days and we scrape by, cook and heat water on gas. We burn firewood for heat. Solar hot water is great… in summer. We’re probably about +$400 a year compared to before we moved from full grid. Going to take a LONG time before my outlay is recovered, and that’s with our own firewood off the farm.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 8, 2021 9:35 am

The middle latitude of the continental US.would be about 38N. Some areas are sunny, some probably not so much around that latitude. I live at 42N and solar is pretty useless here. My brother worked in energy management so he worked out the value of solar for his company. They did not go solar.

October 7, 2021 7:17 pm

Please don’t don’t ignore maintenance and replacement costs for rooftop solar installations and include in your cost-benefit analysis before ordering.

Also, the best performance of solar panels is on cool clear days between 10.00am and 2.00pm in Australian conditions, during the other daylight hours output is “minimal”.

October 7, 2021 7:22 pm

And after they get you all set-up, BAM!!!

Electricity companies get green light to charge rooftop solar owners for exporting power to grid

AEMC chief executive Benn Barr said households selling their excess power back into the grid are putting increasingly unmanageable strain on a system that was not set up to be two-way.

Maybe they will allow you to use the $1445 to offset the grid fees?

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Charles Fairbairn
Reply to  Anon
October 8, 2021 7:45 am

If you sup with the government best sup with a long spoon.

Chris Hanley
October 7, 2021 7:29 pm

Scaling this out to every house in Australia, $65k x 8.3 million households = $539 billion …

That would be $539 billion every 15 years or so.

Chris Hanley
October 7, 2021 7:37 pm

Australia would need to sell an awful lot of coal to China to pay for all the solar panels and EVs.

Peter East
Reply to  Chris Hanley
October 8, 2021 3:15 pm

Is that another form of carbon offsets?

Joel O'Bryan
October 7, 2021 7:44 pm

And what electrical grid with generation schemes in Australia could deliver that increase in demand for night time recharging?
Every rechargeable battery Kw requires 4-5 Kw of dedicated solar panels to recharge during sunlit hours, only to be discharged in about 3 hours at night, then sit depleted for 10m hours until the late morning sun is high enough to begin recharging again. Multiplying all the serially discharging battery banks and then each having dedicated solar panel farms to recharge during the leads to whopping number of solar farms and BISS systems. When it is all said and done, not one kilogram of CO2 emissions have been saved due to production and maintenance logistic tails of solar and battery farms.

Griffith sadly fails at doing an end-to-end energy analysis of where every kilowatt-hr goes and where it s replaced in his scheme. If he were to do such an entire end-to-end analysis, he’d find far unrealistic levels of solar panels and batteries are required. So he is either ignorant or a liar, or both.

Last edited 1 year ago by Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 7, 2021 8:08 pm

Western Australia will not permit solar storage batteries mounted on or close to a building for fire protection purposes.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 8, 2021 9:57 am

Griffith (and others like him, that have to much time on their hands) also ignore the big picture:

The subsidies would cost around $12 billion in the earlier years of such a scheme, but save $300 billion in household energy costs and help reduce the nation’s domestic greenhouse gas emissions by about a third … (THIS REDUCTION WOULD, BASED ON IPCC MODELING, HELP LIMIT EARTHS TEMPERATURE INCREASE BY UP TO 0.002 DEGREES) …, according to analysis by the energy non-profit group, Rewiring Australia.

October 7, 2021 7:53 pm

Like the Apple Store genius?

October 7, 2021 8:03 pm

unfortunately most solar panels in Australia have a life of 8 years and similar for EVs and Batteries
So every 8 years you fork out 100k to be more realisitic
I dont think this individual has a bone of reality in his body

But then again why should it be different the past Chief Scientist Allan Finkle was also a numpty and made illogical statements – and claimed to be an Engineer

the basics dont work

Most high tech items fail because of capacitors, semiconductors etc

At least on older Holdens you could run them for 1million miles as long as they were maintained

Oh well just another misinformed twitter

Izaak Walton
Reply to  John
October 7, 2021 9:22 pm

Not sure where you get the 8 year figure from. Most new panels come with a 25 year
warranty. Plus the latest generation of batteries for cars last over a million km. And both
panels and batteries are improving every year.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 7, 2021 9:34 pm

Our building had a 25-year warranty on our roof in 2014.
Just had to replace the whole thing.
Warranty was void if annual cleaning was not carried out by an accredited contractor.
Who does this?
Certainly not solar panel buyers.
Warranties are just more bullshit.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 7, 2021 10:45 pm

Speaking from hard won experience, the 25 year warranty on panels is worth about as much as a politician’s promise. As an aside, I recently visited my old family farm which is in a highly productive area of the state and rather than thick knee high crop all I could see was acres of solar panels covered in wheatbelt dust. Would love to know how much this solar farm is producing versus the capacity the promoter’s claimed.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 8, 2021 7:59 am

Lots of luck is required if you think that any given PV module manufacturer will still be in business 25 into the future for you to collect on the warranty.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
October 8, 2021 1:32 pm

Who is going to drive 600,000 miles before the battery dies of old age? Both panels and batteries are about at their density limits. The reason batteries start on fire is they are too close to their density limit.

Reply to  Ragnaar
October 8, 2021 4:48 pm


Lithium ion batteries in an EV could last 600,000 miles.

I doubt that.

Reply to  John
October 7, 2021 10:54 pm

The expected life is of the photovoltaic electronics, not the hardware, not the module, with system efficacy measured in a vacuum.

Battery life is correlated with cycles, and indirectly to physical displacement.

Both technologies are being optimized to realize marginal improvements.

Rare earths are hunted and gathered with shared/shifted environment costs in a Green evolution sustained by politically congruent myths. Along with social progress, a veritable Green Leap Forward.

October 7, 2021 8:22 pm

With NPR running stories like this:
Everything will be electric based in no time.

October 7, 2021 8:43 pm

All the problems mentioned in your article, Eric, are solvable as technology progresses.

I’ve never seen any house in Australia which has the entire roof area covered with solar panels. One usually sees, on average, about 1/4th of one side of the roof covered with solar panels, which is the side most orientated towards the sun.

If a house were designed to maximize the amount of solar electricity that could be produced, it would need a flat roof tilted towards the sun. If the entire roof were covered with solar panels, or better still, built with solar tiles, the electricity produced would be about 8 times what the average Australian householder who has solar panels on the roof, currently produces.

“According to Tesla, their solar roof tile is the most durable one found in the market and the glass comes with what they call an “Infinite Tile Warranty.” Basically, the warranty lasts as long as your house is still standing.”

However, most people don’t live in houses designed to maximize the production of solar electricity, but a future scenario when it is both efficient and inexpensive for the average householder (in Australia at least) to produce all the electricity requirements for their home use and EV travel, when EVs become affordable, seems realistic to me.

Reply to  Vincent
October 7, 2021 8:55 pm

Just rotate all the current housing. Problem solvered. 😉

Last edited 1 year ago by leefor
Reply to  lee
October 8, 2021 9:03 am

Just rotate all the political seats.

Reply to  Vincent
October 7, 2021 9:14 pm

The solar technology to enable houses to disconnect from the grid has been available for at least 30 years now.

How come nobody is doing it?

Reply to  Mr.
October 7, 2021 11:08 pm

I doubt that nobody is doing it. I’m sure there are people living in remote areas where there is no grid system. Such people will no doubt have solar panels, battery storage, and/or diesel generators as back-up.

Another reason why it’s difficult to currently produce sufficient solar power for all electricity demands, is the generous feed-in tariff which is designed to encourage people to install solar panels on their roof. There is a legal limit to the roof area that can be covered by solar panels. Without such limits, home owners could create a profitable business as a miniature solar farm, and the grid system would become overloaded.

As solar panels and battery storage become less expensive and more durable, any feed-in tariffs can be reduced to a low, wholesale price, and all subsidies eventually removed.

Reply to  Vincent
October 8, 2021 4:18 am

Are you kidding us? The feed in tariffing are already nothing, and they’re talking about remotely stopping rooftop solar from feeding to the grid.

Reply to  Lrp
October 8, 2021 5:06 am

My feed-in tariff is currently 50 cents per kilowatt hour, and has been around that price for the past 11 years. I wish I’d been allowed to cover my entire roof with subsidized panels.

Reply to  Vincent
October 7, 2021 11:15 pm

For optimal performance solar panels need to change their inclination throughout the year.
I have seen simple systems where the panels are on a 12 slot frame ( change angle each month)
Places such as Philippines need to actually change direction ( south to north facing)

Side issue- other important issues come into play with roof design.
Btw roof ideal angle is 22.5 deg

Reply to  Waza
October 8, 2021 3:47 am

“For optimal performance solar panels need to change their inclination throughout the year.”

That’s true, and if the additional cost of doing this, including the cost of maintaining the system, when building a new house, is justified by the additional electricity produced, then it should be done.

We should exploit all opportunities for new supplies of energy, because energy supplies are the fundamental requirement for our prosperity and well-being.

Reply to  Vincent
October 8, 2021 4:19 am

You do that, but don’t foist on other people.

Reply to  Lrp
October 8, 2021 5:12 am

Where did you get the idea that I want to foist anything on other people. If you want to live as a hermit in a hut in a forest with no electricity at all, that’s fine in my opinion.

I believe in freedom, but also in rationality, common sense, pragmatism, scientific and technological progress, and truth.

Reply to  Vincent
October 8, 2021 9:45 am

You said “we should”. Do you have a large family you are speaking for?

There is a difference between “we should” and “you must” that seems to evaporate quickly when enough head nodders line up to agree.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Vincent
October 8, 2021 6:04 am

Actually, the amount of solar on “houses” is not the issue. It is solar to supply urban areas with multi-family housing, i.e., high-rise apartments. For solar to supply all the power needed for urban areas, you would need unrealizable battery units. In other words how much solar power is needed per person is the appropriate metric and how much battery power is needed per person for storage. Roof top panels won’t meet the need.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
October 8, 2021 4:25 pm

Let’s be clear about this. I’m not recommending that solar power should be the source for all energy requirements. I don’t believe in the ‘climate alarmism’ mantra, but I do believe we should exploit our resources in the cleanest and most efficient manner possible.

In certain countries where there is at least a moderate amount of sunshine and lots of families who live in separate houses covered with roofs that are essentially ‘vacant’ spaces, then using those vacant roof spaces to produce electricity, if it’s technologically feasible and efficient, is just sensible.

It might be the case that, in 50 years’ time, the amount of energy produced from fossil fuels, globally, will be the same as it is today, but the total amount of energy produced will be double what it is today because of the gradual and continuous development of renewables.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Vincent
October 11, 2021 8:53 am

Sorry, but I missed this. Part of the problem is using households instead of single family residences. I suspect this is much smaller than households. Households traditionally include apartments. This makes the cost per installation much higher because of the need for more panels.

Peta of Newark
October 7, 2021 8:55 pm

Oh dear, how to put this…

Let’s give the guy a break can we?

He’s in a damn near impossible job (his own choice surely Shirley) but it’s a job where he’s expected to Please Everybody All Of The Time
For starters that’s a non-starter.

But the point is not to get disheartened by that fact/point, he really does have to do something to buoy-up not only himself but ‘The People‘. He has to have and maintain a spark of Enthusiasm.
Otherwise where is he, where would anybody be without ‘something to look forward to’? Probably in an Emergency Room getting your stomach pumped out of pills, alcohol, Paraquat or of a doughnut-overdose.
Don’t laugh. Doughnut ODs are called Heart-Attack/Stroke/Cancer/Dementia

And that is the job he’s in= trying to envision things to look forward to, things that will make The People = ‘happy’ or ‘better off’ or whatever your vision of sweetness & light might be.

So in a way we are all right/correct. He is doing the horribly difficult job that he’s chosen himself to do and been elected to do, so he is correct in doing/saying what he does. That Is The Job he’s In
A serious problem there is the size of the task and thus we see a tendency to exaggerate = lying basically and then ‘we’ fall foul of the Tangled Web’

But the Naysayers, as we see here in most comments here so far, are also correct. They are pointing out ‘Diversity‘ = pointing out that One Solution will not fit all.
(Something Communist/Socialist Collectives have discovered not to work, many times over)

Is that his ‘Personal Fail’
Is that = ‘Government Fail’
Is that = Fail of Settled Civilisation(s) ##

But then we’re now going out and dispensing ‘Blame’ which is hardly any recipe for making progress on any front.
haha = Dispensing Blame is just another way of saying Climate Science, when all said and done – and as we see when looking on the bright side, progress is glacial.

In a nut-shell, 2 questions:
Are there too many people?
Has Government got too big?

Thus, what to do – if possible without going out ‘laying blame’

## does that mean that all Governments of all Settled Civilisations are, have to be, Socialist and thus by definition, are all Doomed to Fail

Is that what we’re seeing now. looks like it in Europe certainly because that is exactly what the Common Market and then the EU were/are, epic experiments in Socialism and the whole thing is crumbling.
Should that be ‘bumbling’ as in ‘Boris’?

oh dear oh dear, its a laugh-a-minute innit…

Last edited 1 year ago by Peta of Newark
Peta of Newark
Reply to  Peta of Newark
October 7, 2021 9:13 pm

too late for the edit:

Just properly noticed the word ‘loan’ in the headline.

Shows, to my mind, how bad things are.
Because Government Loan = Free Money.
And is simply the adult version of giving/withholding sugar/candy to small children as a Carrot & Stick method of control
Works for a while but once Homeostasis kicks in, as it always does, the end result is Total Disaster

John Pickens
October 7, 2021 10:11 pm

The only reason these solar panels appear to make economic sense is that you are taking $0.06 per kwh coal powered Chinese electricity to make panels producing $0.20 per kwh Australian electricity.

Forget that it took more energy to produce the panels than they will ever deliver, so they are net energy consumers and CO2 producers.

And also forget that the Chinese are now realizing that they can’t sell $0.06 per kwh electricity any more without going deeply in debt.

The current blackouts in China aren’t caused by lack of fuel, it is caused by lack of money to pay for fuel to sell at discounted prices.

When the Chinese start selling solar panels with realistically priced electricity, the math on return on investment for household solar in Australia will become an even bigger joke.

Philip Armbruster
Reply to  John Pickens
October 7, 2021 10:59 pm

So I will have to cut down all the trees shading my property and my next door neighbor’s trees as well?
A friend here in a leafy suburb North of Sydney recently got a solar quote. No go as he has one big tree which shades his house which would apparently require individual controllers on each panel to prevent total shutdown with one panel shaded according to the installer.

I think households are going to be squeezed out of the solar market if the example of the golf club that I am a member of will be typical. They have just installed 576 panels 4 racks over the car park to add to about 200 on the roof. This in addition to about 200 on the roof.
Only trouble in our area is also hail storms which destroyed every panel in a road just adjacent to the club.
My daughter and son have panels on the roof so run their aircons all day to use the power. I wonder if on a cloudy day the grid will become overloaded due to a steep increase in demand? LOL

October 7, 2021 11:21 pm

Should come to New Zealand where the government will subsidize a brand new UV for you! This no crap!
However the government has not taken into account the cost of electricity that a UV uses. You see – the government has forgotten that although although we have a range of hydro and even other renewables as well as gas etc, (Read about the details of the NZ Thermal power station which is actually the largest single power station in New Zealand, and if you read the link, there are other thermal power stations Electricity sector in New Zealand – Wikipedia
The thermal power stations move in when the grid is overloaded which I believe is much of the time!)

Well what this got to do with getting a spanking subsidized UV? Well considering there is alread a significant thermal load in New Zealand, what is going to happen when eveyone starts up their UV? Yup the UV pulls electricity from the national grid, (which is already being topped off by the thermals like I said above) so actually each EV will be pulling more fossil fuels and expelling nasty CO2 pollution.
So if you like to own a EV – go for it,
but if you are purchasing a UV because its going to help save the planet forget it, well at least until when our esteemed govenment decides to dump the thermal power stations, (Which is very unlikely).


October 8, 2021 1:07 am

He has a big battery and an EV. Not because he believes we are experiencing a climate crisis, all this is because he doesn’t trust the government’s ability to run the country or competently provide basic services.

He’s right to worry because lots of grown ups in high places actually believe this stuff-
What does net zero emissions mean? | Explainer | Climate Council
and they groom children with it.

October 8, 2021 1:25 am

I just had solar panels installed to take advantage of the net metering program. It’s a 7.5 kw system and cost $32k. No batteries. My monthly power cost is about $100, so instead of paying the utility, I’ll be paying off the loan for the solar panels. Zero out of pocket cost up front.

October 8, 2021 2:46 am

Rewiring Australia.
The other day we had someone suggesting that the views of Gina Rinehart were based on her links to coal mining. So can we have the same response being made to the views of Rewiring Australia?
From the website of ‘Rewiring Australia’:
Rewiring Australia (was) launched in September 2021. It is supported by an optimistic group of non-partisan Australians to collectively narrate and illustrate the positive outcomes possible for Australia, and the world, in transitioning to rapid decarbonization using an “Electrify Everything” strategy.

October 8, 2021 3:20 am

Hucksters, grifter and other criminals tell lies all the time. Greentards are criminals, grifters and hucksters and all they do is lie.

very old white guy
October 8, 2021 4:44 am

Mass insanity.

October 8, 2021 5:37 am

Notice how they carefully stay away from the current issue of slave labor solar panel components from western China made with coal power plants. Do you really think they would be so deaf and dumb if the product was fur coats or yachts?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
October 8, 2021 8:48 am

China is our shot… out of sight, out of mind, to relieve the burden. With immigration reform, that “burden”, too. Keep women appointed, available, and taxable… dreams of the feminist/ masculinist.

October 8, 2021 5:41 am

So, where does government get the money?
Last I checked, it all comes from the ONLY economic entity that can pay a tax.
The end consumer, the private citizen.

Reply to  bluecat57
October 8, 2021 8:43 am

Productivity: plumb the earth for organic black or rape her for rare Green.

Reply to  n.n
October 8, 2021 9:07 am

Neither one is produced by the government. Private companies do both and pass the “fees” aka taxes on to the end consumer.

October 8, 2021 5:49 am

If Australia wanted a 100% carbon free grid, all they would need is just 3 Palo Verde scale nuclear plants ($12 billion/plant) for 12 million households (AU$50 billion) and an additional 6 nuclear plants for all their commercial and industrial electrical needs for a total cost of US$108 billion (AU$150 billion) or 10 times cheaper than going solar..

There are about 123 million US households, so using your friend’s cost of AU$ 65K/household (US$47,000) that would be US$5,8 trillion just for household use,so adding industrial and commercial use would be at least 3 times that or $17.4 trillion…

For comparison, if the US built just 72 Palo-Verde scale nuclear plants and kept all existing our hydro plants, the US could have a 100% carbon free electrical grid for household, commercial and industrial electrical needs for “just” $864 billion ($12 billion/nuke plant).

Leftists suck at math, logic and critical thinking.

Gerry, England
October 8, 2021 6:35 am

At the core of all this green drivel is the claim that battery cars will get cheaper with increased volumes. Given the constraints on lithium, cobalt and copper, batteries will only ever get more expensive.

You also get the lie that wind power is getting cheaper when of course it isn’t.

October 8, 2021 7:05 am

You can save a lot with slave labor too.

Shanghai Dan
October 8, 2021 7:43 am

About that washing problem? Easy solution! Use solar power from users, to desalinate all that water surrounding Australia – problem solved!

See, I could EASILY be a high-level bureaucrat in Government…

Gordon A. Dressler
October 8, 2021 7:56 am

The very first paragraph in the above article’s quoted excerpts from the article written by Nick O’Malley and Mike Foley is incomplete: here is the paragraph with corrections underlined:
“Australian households would save $4200 on their energy bills by 2035 if governments helped them add solar power and batteries, replace gas cooking and heating appliances and purchase electric vehicles, at a governmental expense of $8400“.

Bookkeeping matters.

October 8, 2021 8:30 am

It’s sad when your own government lies to you and pretends it’s for your own good, it’ll save the environment and the economy – when it’s obvious that it’ll suck the life out of everything.

October 8, 2021 11:31 am

I have done the math every few years on the true life cost of converting your home to Solar and selling the extra to the utility at the price I pay for electricity. To do this you must include the typical maintenance cost. You also need to consider the fact that after about ten years the technology advancements will make your equipment obsolete and replacement parts unavailable requiring total replacement in come cases.

The math is simple. Determine the amount you will need to borrow for your installation – the price quoted by the ex-used car salesman pushing this mistake on you. Look at what your present retirement investment is earning over an average of the last five years. Take that amount and plug it into any of the future value investment calculators on the internet with that rate of return. Now take the loan amount and determine the Total cost of that loan. Subtract what you will pay for the loan and any down payment from what you would have earned. Subtract the total cost from that amount – this is necessary to cover the Maintenance costs over 10 to 15 years. (If you are going to buy all repair parts and make all repairs yourself you can use half that amount.) Don’t forget the added cost of repairing your roof and having the system un-installed and then reinstalled every 20 years. You also need to add the quoted cost of the system to the Tax Assessment value of your house and then a similar increase in Homeowners Insurance value and the increased Insurance payment.

Every time I have done this calculation, using current costs/prices, I ended up losing twice as much from lost income from investing that money I borrowed to have NO payments to the utility – i.e. Fee electricity, as I would had if I had not bought this massive milestone around my neck.
Worse the local Utility is pushing this very hard for the last few months. The have a calculator on their website calculating what you will “Save.” To have their recommended size installation based upon my electrical usage, which thy insert for me based upon my account number, I pay $ 180 a month more per month. I believe this is because I have a heat pump, but am not sure. The HP is the highest rated, most efficient HP sold today.

P.S. I work for the local utility. The chief electrical maintenance technician Installed a Wind Turbine and Lead-Acid Battery storage system at his home, 20 years ago, which is on a bluff overlooking the river. Ten years ago he took it down. He was not saving any money and the cost of maintenance, which he did himself, was most of the problem. The replacement parts alone, which he got at wholesale, made it cost more than metered electricity.

Last edited 1 year ago by usurbrain
Quilter 52
October 8, 2021 8:50 pm

2+2 equaling 4 is so yesterday for today’s green crazies. About the only thing good I can see coming out of all this stuff is that governments are going to run out of the money that these nutters think it has because there simply won’t be enough people left with jobs and actually earning a living to pay the taxes for handouts for the green stuff let alone handouts for all the unemployed that will inevitably result.

When we build our house close to 40 years ago now we put insulation in the walls because that was what we could afford the time. We didn’t have enough money for insulation in the roof but we were able to save that up and it was very easy to put in later. We live in a colder part of Australia ie Canberra and that insulation has certainly kept our gas and electricity bills down and keeps the house cooler in summer as well. It didn’t cost us a huge amount of money. But we were certainly very frustrated when the Rudd government decided to hand out insulation to everybody, killing a few young men along the way working as installers, and taking our taxes to help pay for it. Most of the people, particularly in the very well off town that we live in, could well afford to put insulation in themselves. If the issue was about support for poorer people, insulating government housing would have been a much better option.

We are now in the process of putting on solar panels and battery, not because we are committed to solar which doesn’t make sense economically for anybody including us. However it will give us a degree of protection off grid as coal stations progressively shut down and peak demand is unlikely to provide sufficient energy at times when it is needed just for homes. Let us not even think about industry. We will get no common sense from the Greens until their iPhones can’t be charged. I imagine it will then be all the government’s fault despite the lack of basic common sense and knowledge now.

Build nuclear, now!

October 9, 2021 5:44 pm

You know, some guys got together about a decade ago and claimed that Obamacare was going to save me a lot of money. Since I buy health insurance for 14 to 15 people, I thought this was a neat idea. Since then, my health insurance costs have more than doubled and our coverage and deductibles suck compared to then.

So, pardon my skepticism that these same people are going to drop the cost of energy in the USA and save me lots of money. And of course this article is about crazy Australians but we have the same crazies trying to run the USA into the ground here too.

%d bloggers like this: