Aussie Senator Malcolm Roberts Slams False Net Zero Inflation Claims

Essay by Eric Worrall

Former mining engineer Senator Malcolm Roberts is one of a handful of Australian federal politicians who have the courage to openly criticise the green madness.


Alan Finkel is right when he says we are at a turning point in history. There are two paths for Australia to choose between. One leads to a country where manufacturing thrives and everyone, including the poor, enjoys better living standards on the back of affordable and reliable power. On the other, power prices continue to rise, and the stability of our grid is at risk.

With the highest amount of wind, solar and battery power feeding into the grid in history, Australia’s wholesale power prices have never been higher. All Australians are going to feel the brunt of these price increases. This is a primary cause of our current inflation and it will only get worse, as I have been warning for two years.

Despite net-zero rhetoric, there is an unavoidable truth. Wind and solar cannot solve high power prices and inflation.

Committing to net-zero means that  Government has signed a blank cheque to the wind, solar and battery industry whose only solution is more of the same power shortages and high prices.

For example, the closure of the Liddell coal fired power station will be a loss of 2000MW of dispatchable power.

With unreliable renewables operating on average at 23% of their rated capacity because wind and solar take days off, Australia will need hundreds of square kilometres of solar panels to replace Liddell.[1]

Those hundreds of square kilometres of panels, even running at full capacity, won’t guarantee power is being made when needed. Solar power peaks at midday, far away from the peak demand in the early morning and evening. Wind droughts lasting months have wreaked havoc in Europe.[2] Batteries cannot and won’t fix the gap.

The largest battery in Australia can supply 300MW for an hour and a half, a pittance compared to the 2000MW Liddell could produce.[3] That’s even before we consider that because of transmission and power conversion, battery storage might waste around 20% of the power we use to charge them.[4]

What does all this mean? Wind and solar subsidies force other, more reliable sources of power out of the market. Coal generators are forced into early retirement. Nuclear can’t even be investigated.

Wind and solar are inefficient and intermittent. There is less supply of electricity and it is more unreliable. That makes power more expensive and risky for businesses, employers and wage-earners.

Wind, solar and battery advocates claim that a ‘plan to transition the grid’ can solve all this. What is rarely said is that the plan to ditch coal could cost $320 billion, a cost that one way or another Australians will have to pay from their hip pocket.[5]

Australia is facing down the barrel of a cost of living and inflation crisis. We must abandon the ill-advised forced uptake of wind and solar that is going to keep making power bills more expensive.

Instead, we must stop demonizing coal and build coal fired power stations to cover our transition. Power companies must know that the government won’t force coal to go broke so they can freely invest to maintain their existing assets and build more.

Wherever possible we must build dams with hydro power and retro fit hydro. Snowy Hydro 2.0 has laid bare the false promises of pumped hydro.[6]

And finally, we must investigate nuclear power. Australia has had a nuclear reactor running in Lucas Heights, Sydney since 1958.[7] Australia’s ban on nuclear power is no longer fit for purpose. Everything must be on the table to be investigated if it means bringing Australia’s power bills down.

Although electricity from nuclear is typically more expensive than coal and hydro, in places such as South Australia with its massive uranium reserves and low thermal value coal, nuclear needs to be considered.

It may be years before some of these solutions take effect, but it will be even longer if we do not start them now. Decades of politicians making decisions for the next election instead of the next generation has left Australia with this cost of living and inflation crisis. We must act today with a vision for the future, rooted in reality and with the sole focus of making Australian living cheaper and easier while being environmentally responsible.

[1] For example, 1800Mw Liddell output at 90%, 10-30% capacity factor of solar, estimated 2-3ha (0.02-.03sqkm) per MW of solar power



[4] Battery (Charging) vs. Battery (Discharging)




Reproduced with permission:

Senator Malcolm Roberts is a member of One Nation, which currently holds two federal senate seats, and a scattering of other elected positions.

I regularly write about some of the depressing things happening in Australia, but it is important to remember the deep green politicians who currently run Australia do not have everything their way.

The Aussie government can usually muster just enough votes to push through legislation, with the help of all 12 green senators + one extra, but they have to work for it.

Climate skeptic senators like Malcolm Roberts and Matt Canavan (Queensland LNP) are fighting every day to hold the Australian government to account, by shredding government green narratives and by raising awareness of the catastrophic economic impacts of Australia’s renewable energy push.

4.8 46 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 2:06 pm

I am afraid it will take pitchforks and torches to get rid of the greens.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 2:14 pm

Just 25 years of cooling with continued increase of atmospheric ppm of CO2.

Long term, make nuclear easier, faster, and cheaper.
Meanwhile, coal seems to be the best way for AU.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  John Hultquist
August 27, 2022 12:06 am

No global warming trend for Australia in the last 10 years, UAH indicates.
Geoff S

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 3:02 pm

Tom, Don’t be afraid. Get your pitchfork and join in. If you’re lucky, they’ll be some greens left when it becomes your turn at the front line.

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 5:39 pm

Since the greens will call on swat team and military as soon as they see any real general opposition, pitchforks and torches are very unlikely to accomplish anything except the bodies of their bearers.

Reply to  AndyHce
August 26, 2022 7:30 pm

That’s what an AR-15 is for, along with a Glock 9mm. Not sure what the laws are in Autstalia, but in most of the US one is allowed to defend yourself. Castle doctrine…

Reply to  BobM
August 26, 2022 9:29 pm

They let themselves be disarmed. The forces of evil are trying to do the same in the U.S.

Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
Reply to  Brad-DXT
August 27, 2022 3:17 pm

We are not disarmed.

Only the semi autos were banned.

A bolt action rifle is still a very good weapon.

The Enfield .303 rifle had a very fast bolt action.

There are millions of bolt action rifles in Australia.

Michael VK5ELL

Reply to  Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
August 27, 2022 11:04 pm

Sorry for the mistake. I thought all long guns were banned. Good to know you’re not defenseless. Good luck.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  BobM
August 27, 2022 12:08 am

Sorry, I thought AR-15 was an IPCC report planned for a few years later.
Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 27, 2022 3:22 am


Although, the way things are going with energy rationing, it’s more likely to be AR-15s from the IPCC and their congregation

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  AndyHce
August 27, 2022 4:54 am

There comes a point when the military understand whose side they should be on.

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 9:32 pm

Tar and feathering would be a lot faster. Old solutions to huckster are often the best.

Rick C
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 9:48 pm

This just in: “Government to ban purchase or possession of pitchforks and torches.”

Reply to  Rick C
August 27, 2022 6:57 am

They’d probably hit tar at the same time. Messy hydrocarbon anyway…

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 26, 2022 10:29 pm

And now a support group for Union, Labor and their comrade Greens, the pale green Teal group masquerading as Independents who flock together.

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 27, 2022 2:31 am

That time may be closer than we think.

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 27, 2022 3:19 am

and torches

Yep, they’ll be rationing electricity

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 27, 2022 5:52 am

I just got my notice that my electricity charges are going up 11% (Queensland). I’m heading to Bunnings tomorrow to see if I can get a pitchfork before they are sold out.

It doesn't add up...
August 26, 2022 2:40 pm

Surprised he didn’t mention the rising need for gas fired backup if you go for renewables. Australia has plenty of gas, but they’ve made little attempt to provide reliable supply for themselves. Much of the development has gone towards export LNG, which is fine as an export earner. They needed less gas when all it was doing was providing the flex top up to coal. Now it must cover for Dunkelflaute entirely.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 26, 2022 3:35 pm

“Australia has plenty of gas, but they’ve made little attempt to provide reliable supply for themselves. Much of the development has gone towards export LNG…”

There aren’t two different kinds of gas. Australia has plenty of gas. They have chosen to put it in the hands of people who can make more money by exporting it. But they will let us have some, if we pay the export price.

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 4:12 pm

NW Shelf floating LNG projects are not convenient supplies for Sydney and Melbourne. With gas, location is everything. Pipe gas from the Cooper Pedy basin to the East/South coast and it can be much cheaper, because it is already onshore. You could make it the Henry Hub of Australia with prices way below LNG.

Dance on an outcrop in the middle of Australia and it would make you different from all other animals by 5 o’clock this afternoon.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 26, 2022 5:49 pm

Most gas that is exported comes from the established East Coast pipeline network, which also supplies most of the domestic needs.

As to the “Cooper Pedy basin“, I’m not sure if you mean the Arckaringa Basin, which is around Coober Pedy, and has undeveloped shale oil, or the Cooper Basin, also in SA, which does have lots of gas, and a pipeline to Sydney, Adelaide, and to the export terminals in Queensland.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 10:16 pm

Coober Pedy is an opal mining town in outback South Australia. Also in South Australia (and extending to Queensland) is the Cooper Basin which is one of the first on-shore gas and petroleum deposits (not mines) discovered in the early 1960’s. Coober Pedy is not in the Cooper Basin.

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Stanley
August 27, 2022 5:41 am

indeed, but it is also the centre of an enormous potential gas resource.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 5:04 am

and none of the finds they were raving about a few yrs ago will go anywhere due to Native claimants..same old same old.
and if? by some miracle it did?
it will be OS companies moving in and taking profit with bugger all tax etc paid as per usual too

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 5:40 am


Western Australia produces 61% of Australia’s gas
41% of the gas used in Australia is used in WA

For the last few decades, Bass Strait has been supplying most of eastern Australia’s domestic gas. For decades, these conventional gas fields have been the primary suppliers of Victoria and New South Wales’ gas needs but they are starting to run out of gas.

The supply shortfall is in SA, VIC, NSW, ACT. They need pipeline supply for competitive cost. QLD is further away, so aside from local demand it makes sense to export. Australia should stop being a green pussy and develop its own supply closer to its demand.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 28, 2022 1:45 am

Western Australia isn’t part of Australia according to Nick he uses his special definitions again

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 5:03 am

we HAVE decent oil/gas fields right ON the east coast FFS
just we flogged control to OS companies

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 5:06 pm

Australia will need to tackle the wrongthink about gas from quangos like this

It’s as incoherent as attitudes to nuclear.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 8:49 am

Climate Council – Flim Flam Flannery.

Tekov Yahoser
Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 6:38 pm

Quangos? I have not idea what that means but I intend to make it a thing in the USA.
Soviet of Washington State (West Coast US)

Reply to  Tekov Yahoser
August 29, 2022 9:50 am

QUANGO’s is a downunder term from the wide brown land for –
Our public life is littered with these money sucking parasites mostly GreenLeft in operation.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 5:18 pm

Buying in the spot market sucks when prices rise, doesn’t it?

That’s why long-term contracts, futures, options and swaps exist.

Reply to  Old Cocky
August 26, 2022 5:35 pm

In the long term, if the controllers of the gas can export it, we have to pay the export price. Contracts, options and swaps don’t change that.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 5:41 pm

As John Kenneth Galbraith said, in the long run we’re all dead.

The complaint the other day was that the export gas is largely being sold at a very low price on very long term contracts.

PS Long term contracts, futures, options, etc are intended to reduce volatility, hence the reference to the spot market.
Long-term relative price rises require different responses.

Reply to  Old Cocky
August 26, 2022 5:52 pm

Well, maybe the people who wanted to make a lot of money by exporting aren’t so good at that. That doesn’t help the locals.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 6:02 pm


The long-term supply contracts provided the positive NPV required to justify proceeding with the project. Any sales on top of that at higher than the marginal cost of production are a bonus.

The local gas buyers (and it needs to be at a wholesale level) could have hedged.
One would assume that because they can largely pass on costs in a market with inelastic demand, there was little incentive to do so. In hindsight, taking out a series of call options well out of the money would have been a worthwhile hedge.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 12:25 am

We have an invention named money that can serve as a proxy for human success. We have devices like annual reports of companies that describe money in and money out, hence profitability, hence a measure of whether “people” are doing well or poorly.
Why not make your argument based on available dollar measurements, rather than making vague mutters like “… aren’t so good at that.”
Goodness, you would not like to be accused of arm.waving instead of showing data, like climate alarmists are fond of doing, would you?
Cheers Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 27, 2022 1:26 am

I was responding to:
The complaint the other day was that the export gas is largely
being sold at a very low price on very long term contracts.”
Sounds like someone was not very good at something.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 2:23 pm

Yes, if prices rise the buyers with long-term contracts are happy.

On the other hand, if prices fall, the sellers are happy.
In either case, if the sellers have a positive NPV, it was worth the effort for the seller.

The contracts give the seller a guaranteed revenue stream for the term of the contract with very little downside risk (that’s unexpected cost increases). That allows them to gamble with the un-contracted portion. Basically, it’s an each way bet.

From the buyer’s viewpoint, the are paying too much if prices rise above the contract price, but are insulated against price rises.

Both parties signed the contract, so nobody is being dudded.

They may also have locked in the exchange rate, but that’s another story.

Old Cocky
Reply to  Old Cocky
August 27, 2022 3:45 pm

if the prices fall below the contract price

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 6:09 pm

So, don’t banish competitive sources (coal). Use coal and quite whining about gas being exported.

If it wasn’t exported, and used there, you would be nitpicking about that … somehow rationalizing how inefficient that process is (compared to something else that gets you excited).

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 5:45 am

Are Americans paying the export price? Perhaps in Boston they are paying even more (even ot so long ago importing Russian LNG) because they refuse to build a pipeline to Pennsylvania where gas is plentiful and cheap. But they don’t pay the export price in Maryland next to Cove Point, nor in Texas and Louisiana, home to most of the US LNG exports. Your assertion is demonstrably false.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 12:06 pm

They don’t yet pay the export price, because they don’t have the export capacity. But people are working on it (not Greens).

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 12:49 pm

They will only have to pay export parity if domestic supply is constrained below demand. Then it would no longer be an issue of marginal production cost, but marginal demand destruction price.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 4:06 pm

 if domestic supply is constrained”
Again, there are not two kinds of gas. Domestic and export come out of the same pipeline network. If export pays more, that is where it will go, unless constrained by export capacity (which will then expand).

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 30, 2022 8:30 pm

Which can be changed be passing law that requires certain amount of gas to stay in Australia regardless of export commitments of gas companies. A lot of countries have this type of legislation.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 12:16 am

Or more accurately, control of gas marketing has mostly been left correctly and ethically to those corporations and individuals who spent very large numbers of risk dollars to discover, process and ship it.
Governments, watching from the sidelines, have continued with their main historic function namely running handicapping, knee capping and nit-picking, being the weight in the saddle of the rather good resources industry.
I have been there, Nick. IIRC, you have not.
Geoff S

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 5:01 am

yeah cos we were too STUPID tomake sure we had home supply at fair prices enforced when we did the giveaway price deals with OS buyers and gave all bar 5% of extraction to the same OS corps

Reply to  ozspeaksup
August 27, 2022 12:05 pm

we did the giveaway price deals with OS buyers”
I can’t remember doing that. Must have been someone else.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 28, 2022 1:46 am

You live in the Eastern States so by proxy you did.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 28, 2022 1:44 am

Can you please stop using the term “Australia” when you make those claims …. you mean the Eastern States which is not “Australia”.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 4:59 am

they pushed us to go to LPG cars trucks and buses
even bribed $1,500 to retrofit private cars
and now?
gas is around 119 and servos are phasing it out, it was far cheaper and while less mileage per litre it was still better than petrol.
ive had to borrow a mates gas only car to get to doctors costs 40$ where petrol at 1.70 a litre would cost me close to 80$

Rud Istvan
August 26, 2022 2:41 pm

The Senator is correct. But unfortunately it will take a lot more pain for the people to remove the idiots currently in charge who disagree/don’t understand/are on the take from renewables.

August 26, 2022 2:41 pm

At 6.30pm last night across the AEMO grid that covers Australia except for WA and NT, solar power delivered 15 MW from a nameplate capacity of 15,000 MW, wind delivered 750 MW from a nameplate capacity of 9,800 MW, batteries provided 375 MW.
Demand of 28,000 MW was met by the reliables: coal 18,000 MW, gas 4,350 MW, and hydro 4,400 MW.
Yet supposedly, by 2030 according to the new Labor government, 82% of electricity will be provided by “renewables”. And before the election they promised a $275 reduction in power bills, since withdrawn because of “changed circumstances.”

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Robber
August 26, 2022 2:54 pm

Now you know why math is ‘racist’. Just is, and folks don’t like the hard sums.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
August 26, 2022 3:11 pm

Math is hard, for some people.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
August 28, 2022 2:41 pm

Malcolm Roberts for one.

The answer is 54 (according to his equation) not “100s”.

 Australia will need hundreds of square kilometres of solar panels to replace Liddell.[1]

Reply to  Robber
August 26, 2022 2:57 pm

When wind and solar are delivering so little, I think that a reasonable approach is to demand that the wind and solar operators crank up their supply when needed. The aim is to make the supporters of wind and solar explain why they can’t. That way, the politicians and the public might finally work out that wind and solar simply can’t deliver. No matter how many times opponents of wind and solar say they can’t deliver, the media simply ignores them. We need to get it said by the supporters.

Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
Reply to  Mike Jonas
August 26, 2022 3:15 pm

At lat we have a place where all the The faults of the Renewables is on show.

It’s King Island off Tasmania.

Tasmania “Hydro” with Federal money has installed a Hybred system on the island.

Put in ” King Island Tasmania, Hydro” . & up will come a switchboard showing what is actually happening.

I looked at this yesterday.

It showed Solar as 2 %, wind power was zero, & Diesal was running at 98 %..

Then the Sun set, Solar disappeared, still no wind, & diesal was now 100 per cent.

Now King Island should be perfect for wind power, it’s in the old Roaring 40 tees of the sailing ships, so if the Green movement cannot make renewables work on King Islland, then no way can it work elsewhere.

Michael VK4ELL

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
August 26, 2022 4:20 pm

If you catch it when the wind is blowing you are likely to find a significant fraction of the generation is being dumped into the giant electric fire a.k.a. resistor.

The seems to be very limited. I’ve yet to see it deliver more than a few tens of kW. The batteries (now lead acid, after the original vanadium ones caught fire) rarely seem to have much of a role.

The diesel plant can get quite a thrashing when the wind is gusty, balancing huge swings in output. Of course, they do have just the one three turbine wind farm.

Reply to  Robber
August 26, 2022 6:22 pm

At 11am Saturday, the wholesale cost of electricity for mainland States on the NEM all went negative.

This will be an increasing occurrence during spring in Australia as the weather becomes balmy on average and rooftop solar panels start to sing.

These are the conditions that will be thrown back at anyone claiming “renewables” are expensive. They cannot appreciate the emerging Ponzi scheme.

Albo can claim he has already fixed coral bleaching and electricity prices.

Things might change when older Europeans die this winter and younger ones start raiding government offices for wooden furniture to burn to keep warm.

Peter K
Reply to  Robber
August 26, 2022 9:52 pm

Liddell power station (1.5GW) is to be closed down in 2023 followed by Eraring (2.88GW) in 2025. These two stations provide about 50% of NSW 24/7 energy supply. Interesting times ahead.

Reply to  Peter K
August 26, 2022 10:32 pm

The NSW power stations were paid for by NSW taxpayers, built by the state government and managed by the Electricity Commission of NSW until the assets were privatised after the Federal Labor Renewable Energy Target and incentive subsidies were created.

I understand that the Commission had plans to recondition the coal fired power stations and at some add additional generator units for future demand.

Peter K
Reply to  Dennis
August 27, 2022 4:56 am

Mt. Piper power station and switchyard was built with a footprint to accommodate two future generators. It has the potential to generate 4GW, 24/7 energy. However the writing is on the wall that there is no money to be made whilst they are being blocked from selling energy during the day, in favour of solar, by the AEMO.

Reply to  Peter K
August 27, 2022 5:10 am

and SA wants to build a massive powerline TO nsw to suck at their supply
so far?
no ones been stupid enough to invest;-))

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  ozspeaksup
August 27, 2022 8:14 am

Isn’t that going to be used to supply Canberra with the SA wind generation they bought several years ago?


August 26, 2022 3:01 pm

Thank GOD for Malcolm Roberts…. a lone voice of sanity.

Ron Long
August 26, 2022 3:21 pm

Good of Malcom Roberts to speak up, and he even mentions nuclear. Australia is the perfect site for nuclear, no earthquakes, abundant uranium fuel, offshore winds, and an existing scientific and engineering capability. Nuke ’em!

Stuart Hamish
Reply to  Ron Long
August 30, 2022 10:23 am

Australia is comparatively tectonically stable yet susceptible to offshore earthquakes and tsunamis ……The other consideration is periodic drought ……..This is why the small modular reactors and molten salt Thorium nuclear generators are better options for Australia as they can be situated inland , are virtually meltdown proof and require less cooling water …..A network of. 12 – 20 nuclear power stations could accomodate Australia’s energy needs and create employment and institutional research opportunities …..It will take vision political courage and cross -party endorsement

jeffery P
August 26, 2022 3:22 pm

Facts schmacts. Whaddabout my feelings?

Caaptain Dave
August 26, 2022 3:34 pm

Can we get Senator Roberts to emigrate to Canada? We need politicians like him here.

Reply to  Caaptain Dave
August 26, 2022 5:53 pm


Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 26, 2022 8:49 pm

Nick again shows he cannot stomach the truth and facts being heard by the public.. !

Malcolm Roberts is so far above the honesty and integrity of any Labor, Green Teal (and many Liberals).

No wonder Nick doesn’t want him heard.

Reply to  b.nice
August 26, 2022 11:43 pm

Roberts is hardly a man who knows what he is talking about when it comes to climate science. All he seems to be saying here without any evidence is the data is fraudulent… coz.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Simon
August 27, 2022 12:38 am

If you had been watching you would have seen Cox respond with a fraudulent graph. That is what you should criticise. Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 27, 2022 12:55 pm

Nothing fraudulent about it. If you think it is, then please state why. As opposed to Roberts who just ran through the old skeptic playbook and cherry picked dates. He really looked silly and was laughed at more than once.

Stuart Hamish
Reply to  Simon
August 30, 2022 10:05 am

” He really looked silly and was laughed at more than once ” ? ………It is not always a dishonor to be laughed at on the ABC’s risible Q&A program and its lefty lynch mob audience Simon …….Do you remember the Q&A producers invited Zak Mallah to ambush a conservative politician with a “gotcha’ audience question that backfired spectacularly when it was revealed terror suspect Mallah threatened ASIO officers and Tweeted a fantasy about gang raping two respected female journalists ?……Or how about the misandrist hate fest episode hosted by Fran Kelly so disgusting and embarrassing it was expunged from the archives ? ……..For our American and assorted non Australian WUWT commentators and blog editors this is what you need to know about that program…..It is not unreasonable to surmise Brian Cox was advised to get the jump on Malcolm Roberts….. ..Senator Roberts had the last laugh when Tim Ball and Tony Heller came to his defense

Reply to  Simon
August 27, 2022 5:02 am

Cox sprouting LIES and fraudulent graphs… as usual

He’s “pretty” though, so Simon believes his lies.

Reply to  b.nice
August 27, 2022 12:57 pm

Again, if the graphs are fraudulent, then please explain why. Good luck. Many have tried all failed. That’s the problem for skeptics they keep saying it, but when pressed they have no evidence whatsoever.

Stuart Hamish
Reply to  Simon
August 30, 2022 9:44 am

” Again if the graphs are fraudulent, then please explain why ….. Many have tried all failed ……Thats the problem for skeptics …when pressed they have no evidence whatsoever ” ………… Well that depends on how one might define fraud …..Why do you think Senator Malcolm Roberts invited the illustrious climate skeptic Tony Heller out to Australia following Brian Cox’s ABC Q&A ‘gotcha” ambush Simon ?…Why won’t Brian Cox or NASA’s Gavin Schmidt debate Tony Heller in a public forum ?…The offer was always there .They are scared of him thats why …….Tony Heller compiled ample evidence of inter-agency data tampering and collusion posing very pertinent questions in his presentation : ” Overwhelming Evidence of Collusion ” …….To quote Heller : ” How can four different independent agencies come up with four very similar graphs when NASA doesnt even agree with themselves from 20 years ago ” ?.. That is a good question .Can you answer that Simon ? ..Nick Stokes ?…..He adds : ” NASA surface temperatures have completely erased the post -1940 cooling [ 0.48C from my reckoning ] seen in 1974 NCAR graphs …….There are grossly inadequate amounts of both historical and current data to produce a meaningful long term temperature graph for the earth .Much of the data is fake – by their own admission “…… Yes, true… Phil Jones wrote in a 2009 Climategate email ” For much of the SH between 40 and 60S the normals are mostly made up as there is very little ship data there.” .Climate scientists have admitted to falsifying hiding or using dubious data ..Brian Cox prefers to pretend this is a “conspiracy theory ” yet a lot has changed in the six years since that Q&A exchange .John McLeans audit of the HadCrut4 data that is a partial template for the four temperature graphs, uncovered some appalling errors that stood unnoticed and uncorrected for decades…. Are you familiar with John McLeans PhD project ?..The ‘evidence’ is right there in his audit viewable online .. To continue with Tony Heller: ” The best temperature data set [ by far ] is the US data ,which has been altered by NOAA and NASA over the past 20 years to turn 90 years of cooling in to warming .Global temperatures have also been massively altered over the past 45 years ……There is no conceivable way this graph could have been produced without lots of collusion between the four ‘independent’ agencies ” ………………….NASA’s Gavin Schmidt actually conceded : “we get our data from NOAA ” . So the graphs are not independent of one another, nor are they accurate temperature datasets, and some of the data is fraudulent [ ie Phil Jones 2009 Climategate email quoted above and McLeans HadCrut4 audit ] ……No ‘luck’ required Simon and climate skeptics have not “all failed ”

Reply to  b.nice
August 27, 2022 3:07 pm

He’s also extremely clever. Have a listen to the Infinite Monkey Cage.

Reply to  b.nice
August 28, 2022 2:32 pm

I wouldn’t have said he was pretty. Are you trying to tell us something?

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Simon
August 27, 2022 5:55 am

Roberts does appear to be a bit more in touch with the realities of energy supply and keeping the lights on in Australia in 2023. Cox is no more than a presenter with a physics degree who has learned his lines about alarmist climate projections for dates far into the future where his assertions will not be tested for a while.

Ask Cox whether he has even read the work of Wijngaarden and Happer.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
August 27, 2022 12:58 pm

Roberts does appear to be a bit more in touch with the realities of energy supply and keeping the lights on in Australia..” Maybe, but he is clueless about climate change.

Stuart Hamish
Reply to  Simon
August 30, 2022 9:47 am

No Malcolm Roberts is not clueless about climate change [ did you mean ‘climatology “?] ….You are ….Read my response above

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  b.nice
August 27, 2022 12:36 am

There is not one concept or idea that I disagree with in this Malcolm Roberts piece.
Factually, it seems to be free of error.
What item(s) specifically are behind your somewhat nasty comment?
I think that the knowledge of large uranium resources in SA is not a real incentive to build nuclear power in SA, but it has long been evident that Australia needs a different policy set on nuclear.
Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 27, 2022 1:39 am

nasty comment?”
I was simply enthusiastically agreeing with the previous commenter.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 27, 2022 5:03 am

So , absolutely ZERO argument about Malcolm’s facts.

OK !

Perhaps you should post some FAKE graphs like Cox.. right down your alley !

Reply to  Nick Stokes
August 28, 2022 1:47 am

Only if he takes Maddog Bandt with him.

another ian
Reply to  Caaptain Dave
August 27, 2022 2:41 am

How about Nick migrate to Canada?

Reply to  another ian
August 27, 2022 11:01 am

There’s about 450,000 immigration applications into Canada for this year.

But if Nick is a white male heterosexual senior, his application will be spiked the moment the immigration dept bureaucrats see his passport photo.

That’s just the way the “progressive” western democracies are these days.

August 26, 2022 4:06 pm

You bemoan the lack of Aussies standing up to the green madness. Why then have you not mentioned the climate book of the year by Professor Ian Plimer emeritus professor of Geololgy at University of Melbourne? GREEN MURDER–NET ZERO Connor Court Publishing Australia 600 pages 1600 scientific references.

Reply to  Terri Jackson Msc MPhil InstP
August 26, 2022 5:45 pm

An expensive book that few would read even if free.

Reply to  AndyHce
August 27, 2022 5:13 am

thats why i will be asking the library to purchase and writing the local paper to promote it being there

August 26, 2022 5:21 pm

we must stop demonizing coal and build coal fired power stations to cover our transition. Power companies must know that the government won’t force coal to go broke so they can freely invest to maintain their existing assets and build more.

Or simply demand a level playing field from generators. Namely all tenderers of electrons to the communal grid must reasonably guarantee them 24/7/365 (ie short of unforeseen mechanical breakdown) along with voltage and frequency maintenance or keep them for themselves. What we have now is farcical State sponsored dumping with the enrichment of crony capitalists to the long term detriment of power consumers. Every employee of the ACCC should be sacked for their dereliction of duty here.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  observa
August 26, 2022 5:50 pm

ACCC = Australian Competition & Consumer Commission.

Reply to  observa
August 26, 2022 6:08 pm

Every employee of the ACCC should be sacked for their dereliction of duty here.

There is a solid case for pursuing purveyors of “renewable” hardware that they have false and misleading advertising.

It takes 80+years of operation for a solar panel on a roof in southern Australia to recover the energy that it took to make it and get it mounted on a roof. It is unsustainable and certainly not renewable.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  RickWill
August 27, 2022 12:49 am

Radio 3AW Melbourne (big, influential) carried a spoken commercial just earlier today, from a union of electricians. It started with the claim that everyone knows that renewables are the cheapest energy. Overall, they are not.
There are not many economic studies that include the real cost of providing fossil fuel electricity when renewables show their intermittent performance when sun don’t shine, wind don’t blow and hydro full dams can’t produce because they would flood downstream.
Where is the ACCC indeed?
Why has the ACCC failed to commission its own neutral economic cost comparison and show it to politicians? Geoff S

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
August 27, 2022 12:52 pm

Propagandists know it’s always best to tell the biggest lie up front.

August 26, 2022 5:39 pm

Net Zero = COVID lockdowns 2.0

August 26, 2022 6:01 pm

I wonder how many people actually know that oceans cannot sustain a surface temperature above 30C.

This is the simplest way to condemn every climate model to the rubbish bin of bad ideas because all have tropical ocean surface exceeding 30C.

I wonder how many people appreciate that a solar panel needs to last over 80 years to recover the energy that it took to mine and transported materials to China to make it, transport the panel to any woke nation and then mount it on a roof?

This is the simplest way to condemn any plan aspiring to achieve Net Zero.

Ric Howard
Reply to  RickWill
August 26, 2022 7:23 pm

, can you explain the 30C limit (or point me to something that does)? Does the limit only apply to the current earth? I have seen references to ancient sea temperatures higher than 30C.

For example, this article mentions sea temperatures in the 35-40C range:

And this one mentions 35C and 41C:


Peta of Newark
Reply to  Ric Howard
August 27, 2022 12:46 am

Ric: It’s sometimes wise to check your own links before you hit Save/Send/Submit….

The first one: ‘suggests‘ that critters could survive 35C or higher.
In turn based on a ‘suggestion‘ that CO2 levels 5 to 10 times higher than now would cause such temperatures.
Also ‘possibly‘ and ‘likely‘ feature strongly as reasons for the suggestions.

Quote:which shows a general coupling between tropical seawater temperatures and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels since the Paleozoic, indicates that tropical temperatures during the icehouse climate of the Carboniferous period were broadly similar to present (∼25–30 °C), and suggests that benthic metazoans were able to thrive at temperatures of 35–40 °C during intervals of the early and possibly the latest Paleozoic when CO2 levels were likely 5–10× higher than present-day values

Fantasy and Garbage

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Ric Howard
August 27, 2022 12:59 am

Not wanting to answer for Rick, but you are talking about events more than 500 million years ago. You are expecting the radioisotope events that happened then to be adequately described by science developed over the last 100 years. The measurement of decay constants is under strain to be good enough to do this. Also, the “easy to quote” math linking isotopes back then to sea temperatures back then carries large uncertainty. The Authors use uncertainty estimates that do not exclude a 30 C estimate way back then. Geoff S

Reply to  Ric Howard
August 27, 2022 11:12 am

You need to appreciate the difference between “SEAS” and “OCEANS”.

Many smaller, shallower, calmer bodies of water (e.g. in SEAS) can experience short spells of 30+ surface Temps.
Particularly in tropical climate zones.

However, these locations are of little influence compared to what happens in vastness of OCEANS.

Ric Howard
Reply to  Ric Howard
September 1, 2022 3:26 pm

After some more googling I found a post on BomWatch that references a paper supporting the ~30ºC limit:

August 26, 2022 6:28 pm

Malcolm Roberts is the only Australian politician with any science/engineering background. As such he is rediculed, and the media rarely quote him.
Its irrelevant that he can back up his statement. Pity.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Peter
August 26, 2022 7:26 pm

Conservatives in the United States should ask Malcolm Roberts to come over and advise them on reality. U.S. conservatives ought to be saying the same things Malcolm Roberts is saying about the power grid.

Where is the “American” Malcolm Roberts?

Reply to  Tom Abbott
August 27, 2022 5:40 am

We have a Uniparty here in the States, Tom. We have left-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans, but they are both wings on the same bird.

Voters are given the illusion of choice, but in the end, it’s all one big fat turkey known as Washington DC. Both wings are only interested in making sure the ‘Bird’ gets well-fed and the taxpayers pick up the tab.

It used to be that you could vote Republican and that would slow down the swirl in the toilet. But now they are in it (the looting of America) full tilt with the Democrats. All of DC – both parties and the DC bureaucracy – is united against outsiders or anyone who is intent on changing the status quo.

Reply to  H.R.
August 27, 2022 9:01 am

That’s why they were and are opposed to Trump – he was for policies that would benefit the most citizens, regardless of their status, and not to getting the elite their graft.
We need to get rid of the RINOs and demoncrats in congress so when Trump or his successor gets in the presidency, he has the backing he needs to reverse the decline.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  H.R.
August 28, 2022 2:49 am

“We have a Uniparty here in the States, Tom. We have left-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans, but they are both wings on the same bird.”

That is certainly the case when it comes to Human-caused Climate Change. They are all on the same page in accepting that CO2 is a demon gas that needs to be controlled. No politician of either party is prepared to question the narrative. So the narrative continues.

Reply to  Peter
August 27, 2022 5:18 am

Useful idiots who have been comprehensively fooled will never recant, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. I know, I have one in my mother-in-law.

Tom Abbott
August 26, 2022 7:05 pm

From the article: “Australia is facing down the barrel of a cost of living and inflation crisis. We must abandon the ill-advised forced uptake of wind and solar that is going to keep making power bills more expensive.”

Put this man in charge!

Reply to  Tom Abbott
August 27, 2022 5:15 am

Sadly they are more likely to put him on charges!

August 26, 2022 9:08 pm

I fly remote control aircraft. It reminds me of the time, 60 years ago when I was a hot shot fighter pilot flying jets of aircraft carriers.

At my age I’m not a great pilot, even of toy aircraft if it’s windy, so I’ve been having a ball the last 9 days. You see there has been virtually no wind, & with mostly light overcast it has not been too glary.

Thank god my power doesn’t come from wind or solar.

August 26, 2022 11:39 pm

Anyone in the ACCC taking their salary under false pretences up for doing the decent thing too?
Snowy Hydro boss Paul Broad says fallout with Chris Bowen contributed to resignation (
Must be someone amongst the overstuffed suits that doesn’t like what they see shaving in the mirror each morning.

Reply to  observa
August 27, 2022 8:20 pm

Bowen is the crash test dummy imbecile. His past record of portfolio failures speak for themselves.

August 27, 2022 6:05 am

I just came across this:

Nice graphic.

S. L.
August 27, 2022 6:23 am

WTF is a “climate skeptic”?
‘Global warming’ is a hoax. A moving of the goal posts from AGW to GW to CC. If the ‘science is settled’ why do we need to keep funding these shysters?

August 27, 2022 8:41 am
An investigation by Nordex has shown the Nordex N90/2500 wind turbine collapsed after running for over four hours in an “overspeed condition”.
A spokesman for Nordex said: “A Root Cause Analysis (RCA) investigation determined that a technical issue, starting within an Uninterrupted Power Supply cabinet for one of the blades, triggered an unprecedented chain of events in quick succession. This disabled the main power supply and the backup power supply to each blade of the pitch system, therefore all three blades of the wind turbine were left without power resulting in a fixed state.”

So wind turbines need their own power supply, provided from fossil fuels.
Renewable Energy World:It Takes Power to Make Power: Temporary Power Keeps Wind Turbines Spinning”

Temporary power suppliers play a pivotal role in wind farm commissioning in remote areas. Off-grid generators and load banks allow commissioning turbines before connection to the power grid, avoiding commissioning delays. Recently, a 33 kV high-voltage power generation and load bank package was installed at one wind farm’s main substation so comprehensive testing could begin – not just on the turbines but also on all high-voltage gear. Because the wind farm developer could test multiple turbines at once, the commissioning process sped up. The time saved allowed wind farm owner to meet its commercial operation date and to realize the tax incentives and credits available once the wind energy system was fully operational. 

Following commissioning, low-voltage power can be supplied at the base of each turbine to power ancillary equipment, such as lighting and the hydraulic pumps to turn the rotor and prevent bearing lock-up if the turbine needs to be taken offline. Alternatively, a central high voltage package can power the integrated system from one point of connection, keeping transformers and switchgear running, in addition to the turbines if the site needs to come offline. 

Maintenance typically uses temporary power from standard generators, while transformers are also made available for the higher voltages, such as 690V (the industry standard for many years). In fact, transformers have been supplied for multiple uses. To connect the circuits in the field, 480 V/34.5 transformers in the 2,500 to 5,000 kVa range are provided. To keep the system operational, power has been supplied to the field when the main transformer has failed or the utility has to take the distribution system out of service.

In conclusion, temporary power keeps wind farms generating power. These generators power the larger wind turbines coming to market, provide off-grid power to remote areas, scale up or down as the project progresses, as well as support operations and maintenance to make sure production is steady. The benefits of temporary power also apply to other renewable energy sources such as solar, as the pre-commissioning and commissioning procedures are similar to wind energy.”

This morning in the UK, wind was 3%, Solar 7%, coal 2% and gas 60%. Wind hasn’t gone above 3% all day.

Tekov Yahoser
August 27, 2022 6:35 pm

Expensive and scarce energy IS the goal. You can’t placate Mother Gaia with all the human viruses running about.

Coach Springer
August 28, 2022 6:16 am


Well, that’s because they cause higher power prices and inflation.

Verified by MonsterInsights