ABC: “Ramp Down” Fossil Fuel Production Instead of Jailing Protestors

Essay by Eric Worrall

The Aussie federal government owned ABC thinks climate extremists are just trying to show us the disruption climate chaos will bring.

If NSW wants to stop climate change protests, there’s an alternative to jailing activists

ABC Science / By environment reporter Nick Kilvert
Posted Yesterday at 4:30am

If the New South Wales government and opposition want to stop disruptive climate protests, the answer may be hiding in plain sight, and it’s not jailing protesters.

Some of those arrested were charged with affray — a serious crime carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail.

In response to critics, NSW PremierDominic Perrottet said the outcome was “pleasing to see” and if “protesters want to put our way of life at risk, then they should have the book thrown at them”.

“We want people to be able to protest, but you should do it in a way that doesn’t inconvenience people right across New South Wales,” the Premier said earlier this week.

He’s right. At least in his description of climate protests. They are inconvenient. That’s the point.

Climate protests are specifically intended to give a small, controlled taste of the major disruptions that climate change is already causing, and will cause on a much larger scale in future.

Were New South Wales — or for that matter, the federal government — already doing so, it’s unlikely Ms Coco’s protest would have happened.

But they’re not.

Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2022-12-09/climate-change-protests-jail-what-could-be-more-effective/101737704

Not one use of the “N” word.

If climate protestors were serious about reducing CO2, instead of continuously indulging their Trotskyite fantasies of global revolution, they would hold their noses and join with conservatives in embracing nuclear power.

France proved in the 1970s that zero carbon nuclear power can replace fossil fuel. No need for fossil fuel backup when you have a zero carbon nuclear power plant producing reliable energy 24×7.

How long has the CO2 emissions stalemate lasted, between conservatives and liberals over net zero and renewable energy? How long do greens want it to last?

Nuclear power is acceptable to conservatives, the main opponents of spending trillions on useless, unreliable renewable energy. That stalemate between greens and conservatives, and the fact renewables don’t work that well, has prevented significant decarbonisation of the global economy for decades – except for places like France, which have very low emissions per capita because of their acceptance of nuclear power.

So why don’t greens try to compromise, and embrace a solution which works, and which is acceptable to their political opponents, for the sake of the planet?

In my opinion, the obvious reason is climate change is not their genuine top priority. It is government control of the economy they crave, back door communism. The fake climate crisis is just an excuse for the left wing political “reforms” greens want to inflict on society.

Greens are not even trying to be subtle, about the fact most of them think reducing CO2 emissions and destroying Capitalism is a package deal.

Prove me wrong greens – the moment groups like Fireproof Australia follow Greta Thunberg’s lead, and start protesting for more nuclear power, or support the Premier of South Australia’s recent call for civilian nuclear reactors. The moment green groups stop fighting on two fronts, by abandoning their ridiculous battle against the most successful economic system ever developed, they might suddenly discover they are are winning their battle to decarbonise the global economy.

Update (EW): Nick points out the South Australian premier later appeared to walk back his initial enthusiasm for nuclear.

4.6 23 votes
Article Rating
46 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
December 9, 2022 6:13 pm

ABC seems to be a meatheaded as NPR or PBS in the US, or the BBC in the UK. As they tend to favor the more leftist of their countries major parties, and do so in a naive way, one should really blame the politicians the newsies are sucking up to.
The newsies are social climbing suckups, but not at all original.

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 9, 2022 8:57 pm

Arrest the protesters, Geotag them prior to release. When they pull into a Gas station to fill up, turn off their pump. “Sorry, you’re a climate protester, no gas for you”

Redge
Reply to  Bryan A
December 10, 2022 3:25 am

Nor electricity since the only reliable electricity comes from fossil fuels and nuclear

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 10, 2022 7:13 am

We have the same issue with CBC in Canada.

2AFE1CCD-D8D8-4485-AE6F-6712D3CAF092.jpeg
Steve Case
December 9, 2022 6:42 pm

 It is government control of the economy they crave, back door communism.
______________________________________________

That’s what the “Duck Test” says.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Steve Case
December 9, 2022 10:14 pm

It’s control, period, unadorned with adjectives. Economic control is just a subset. Government is just a means. They’d be just as happy with a king and knights in green armor.

Denis
December 9, 2022 6:49 pm

“If climate protestors were serious about reducing CO2, instead of continuously indulging their Trotskyite fantasies of global revolution, they would hold their noses and join with conservatives in embracing nuclear power.”

If they were serious they would change their personal behavior to eliminate from their lives all forms of fossil fuels, including most electricity, and anything made from fossil fuels including fabrics, plastics, medications, vehicle fuel — everything. At least then we would know of their sincerity.

SMC
Reply to  Denis
December 9, 2022 8:10 pm

You appear to be making some false assumptions about Watermelons.

  1. You seem to think they are rational
  2. You seem to think they are sane
  3. You seem to believe they actually have the courage of their convictions
Hivemind
Reply to  SMC
December 10, 2022 2:54 am

4. You seem to think that there’s any way they’d follow the same set of restrictions that they’re imposing on you.

rah
Reply to  Denis
December 10, 2022 1:18 am

Your talking about people like these losers.

comment image

Matt Kiro
Reply to  Denis
December 10, 2022 4:46 am

They wouldn’t even be able to get out of bed if they swore off fossil fuels, because they wouldn’t even have one. There would be no alarm clock to wake them. Perhaps a worn down hand me down blanket to keep warm. They truly have no idea what they are protesting.

AGW is Not Science
December 9, 2022 7:39 pm

The only “climate chaos” is those idiots and the policies they support.

If not for all that twaddle, nobody would notice “climate change.”

Jeff Alberts
December 9, 2022 7:41 pm

“Climate protests are specifically intended to give a small, controlled taste of the major disruptions that climate change is already causing”

Hmm. If climate change is supposedly already causing major disruptions, why do we need protestors?

mleskovarsocalrrcom
December 9, 2022 7:45 pm

Of course, the solution is to acquiesce to the protesters.

Nick Stokes
December 9, 2022 7:57 pm

support the Premier of South Australia’s recent call for civilian nuclear reactors.”

The Premier made no such call. The Murdoch press tried to beat up such a story, but he made his view perfectly clear:

“South Australia’s premier has comprehensively rejected the future use of nuclear power generators in Australia, saying the “completely uneconomic” technology had already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed.“

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 9, 2022 8:50 pm

Well, what the Advertiser said he said, even if true, is not a “call for civilian nuclear reactors“.

bnice2000
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 9, 2022 9:19 pm

Nuclear power is a source of baseload energy with zero carbon emissions. So, for someone like myself, who is dedicated to a decarbonisation effort, I think we should be open-minded to those technologies and I think it would be foolhardy to have a different approach.”

Nick has deliberate and deep-seated comprehension issues !!

Nick Stokes
Reply to  bnice2000
December 9, 2022 9:31 pm

The man himself said:

“However, in his ABC’s 7.30 interview, the South Australian premier said his only intention had been to say the nuclear power debate should be contested solely on the evidence. 
“I was simply saying: ‘We’ve got people who are advocating that position without any reference to what the implications would be of the price on energy in our nation at the moment’. And that strikes me as being rather foolhardy,” he explained. “

downunder
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 9, 2022 11:07 pm

He recanted on his previous position; Lies upon lies.

aussiecol
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 9, 2022 11:07 pm

”The man” more than likely was pulled into line by Labor heavyweights. Can’t have a Labor Premier going against Federal Labor principles.

Matt Kiro
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 10, 2022 5:05 am

Of course the fool talks about price and time for nuclear but doesn’t bring it up for solar and wind. Never mind the space requirements.

downunder
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 9, 2022 11:05 pm

He lied, which is normal for Labor. He went back on his initial declarations after being smacked down by his mates

Iain Reid
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 10, 2022 12:52 am

Nick,

I wonder who did the thorough investigation?
Yes, as it takes time to build a nuclear power plant so ties up a lot of capital in the initial phase before there is any return. After then it is cost effective as the fuel relative to output is very cheap. Not as cheap as wind or sun but wind and sun need continual support to use their ‘free’ power
However, consider that a say 3 Gigawatt nuclear plant should produce at least 95 % of that capacity for fifty or more years. (with down time planned for reduced load periods, so maximum power available at times of high demand)
That requires about six times more wind capacity to match that or ten times more solar capacity plus the extra transmission lines, batteries, back up and balancing power plants as well, or using a neighbouring states’s grid to do that duty.

Redge
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 10, 2022 3:28 am

Then clearly the Premier of South Australia is a complete and utter dick

Walter Sobchak
December 9, 2022 8:01 pm

“If NSW wants to stop climate change protests, there’s an alternative to jailing activists”

Machine guns. Cheaper, faster, more effective.

Last edited 1 month ago by Walter Sobchak
bnice2000
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
December 9, 2022 9:21 pm

Tar and feather…

Indelible green dye…

Lockdown with zero electricity unless wind and solar are providing 100% of NEM requirements.

Shoki
December 9, 2022 10:32 pm

How about beating and jailing them to show what is coming from these woke assholes in government when you don’t toe the line?

Hivemind
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 10, 2022 2:57 am

Leave them in the centre of Australia with nothing made from fossil fuels. No clothes, no metals, etc. See how long they live then. See if they are able to realise the stupidity of their beliefs.

Rod Evans
December 10, 2022 1:10 am

The Climate Alarmists demonstrate against CO2 being created by humans Our energy systems are dominated by fossil fuel so is our agricultural production.
The alarmists claim if we stop using fossil fuel we will impact climate change in a positive way.
Their belief us never tested because it is not possible to know if less CO2 emissions would improve the world or not. Those of us who look at the big picture say CO2 is a benefit for the world and for mankind. WE see the positive and give examples by the boat load of where fossil fuels are helping not only mankind but also the planet and the eco systems of all life forms on earth.
The alarmists could, as the article suggests, demand we adopt nuclear as the primary energy source of mankind. It is such an obvious option that meets the alarmists objective…apparently. It does not produce any CO2 at the point of energy production, it is very reliable and it is very discrete in terms of energy footprint, i.e. MWh/metre.
The alarmists however, are determined to block nuclear, as well as blocking the use of fossil fuels? That raises the question, what are the aims of the alarmists movement overall? If they genuinely wish to reduce CO2, then we have the technology to do that via nuclear. Whether the rational thinkers among us feel that is necessary, or not, we could actually do it.
While the Green energy advocates ignore nuclear, to reduce CO2 emissions bizarre but doable in parts, then we should ignore the Green energy movement because they are irrational hypocrites.

Curious George
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 10, 2022 8:09 am

Easy – don’t “ramp down”. Stop them. For a week.

John in Oz
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 10, 2022 4:42 pm

“it is not possible to know if less CO2 emissions would improve the world or not”

If, as they claim, the industrial revolution was the cause of the CO2 increase, we/they only have to look at the natural disasters that occurred prior to 1850 or so.

This must be the perfect world they wish us to return to.

Fire/flood/heat wave occurrences are not modern phenomena

Walbrook
December 10, 2022 2:11 am

If we shut down all our fossil fuel plants, then the Trots down at the ABC would soon discover that they could no longer broadcast their leftist rubbish.
But being hypocrites, they would cry out for a diesel generator.

Redge
December 10, 2022 3:24 am

On a freezing day in the UK, wind and solar are really pulling through for us

With 13.5 GW installed, we’re managing a full 2.42GW of solar and with 25 GW of wind, we’re managing 4.45GW

Demand is currently nearly 39GW so let’s build another 175 GW of wind to make up the shortfall, shall we?

And these clowns think unreliables are the way forward

Screenshot 2022-12-10 111723.jpg
Matt Kiro
Reply to  Redge
December 10, 2022 5:11 am

Could you build a wall of offshore windmills to stop all the illegal landings in the south and handle two problems at once?

Redge
Reply to  Matt Kiro
December 10, 2022 5:26 am

No.

Wind turbines are bird choppers not people choppers

Mark BLR
Reply to  Redge
December 10, 2022 10:07 am

With 13.5 GW installed, we’re managing a full 2.42GW of solar and with 25 GW of wind, we’re managing 4.45GW

In order to see the longer term (23 month) view I updated my spreadsheet for the “island of Great Britain” electricity grid up to yesterday (8/12/2022).

Note that the “capacity” numbers come from the BEIS’s “Energy Trends: UK renewables” webpage (direct link) and their “Renewable electricity capacity and generation (ET 6.1 – quarterly)” Excel file, with “GB = England + Scotland + Wales”.

GB-Electricity_Wind-Solar_010121-091222.png
Mark BLR
Reply to  Mark BLR
December 10, 2022 10:09 am

Zooming in to put last week’s “4 to 10-day blocking high” event into perspective …

GB-Electricity_Wind-Solar_0107-091222.png
Quilter52
December 10, 2022 4:26 am
ABC is a very expensive joke on Australian taxpayers. The only good thing about these fools is that when the lights go out because there is insufficient power being generated - likely in the next few years, they won't be able to broadcast and even if they do, we peasants, forced to pay for them, won't be able to watch them. 
Redge
Reply to  Quilter52
December 10, 2022 10:17 am

ABC is a very expensive joke on Australian taxpayers. 

The only good thing about these fools is that when the lights go out because there is insufficient power being generated – likely in the next few years, they won’t be able to broadcast and even if they do, we peasants, forced to pay for them, won’t be able to watch them.

That’s better

Rusty from the West
December 10, 2022 7:09 pm

With any ABC story you only have to check the author to determine it’s validity.
If it’s Nick Kilvert you know it’s going to be some sort of Warmist rubbish.

Bill Powers
December 11, 2022 5:50 am

“…ABC thinks climate extremists are just trying to show us the disruption climate chaos will bring.”

Seems to me the chaos is coming from the Government sanctioned Anarchists.

max
December 11, 2022 8:51 am

Please notify me when the ABC has converted its entire fleet of vehicles to plug-in electric. They have dozens of news vans, satellite vehicles, cars for “talent”, etc. That are expected to work 24/7 for news gathering. Let’s see how they do, and if they make a measurable difference in CO2 emissions. I’m betting no.

Energywise
December 11, 2022 12:58 pm

The Aussie socialists have gone full on green blob – they will pay dearly for it, in cash and citizen rebellion

Dena
December 11, 2022 2:55 pm

Strangely enough I don’t think marxism is their intended goal. What they are thinking (if you can call it that) is they want the simple life where they are in the country and nature provides all their needs. This is how marxism is sold but you don’t have to believe in marxism to have the same idea of the perfect life.
The solution is fairly simple. Give them 40 acres and a mule then see just how long it takes them to realize nearly everything they use is the result technology that relies on cheap energy. Technology free us from starvation and difficult labor. This revolution probably started after the middle ages but really took off in the last two centuries with the industrial revolution. Freedom from drudgery can only be accomplished through technology. It never existed in nature.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights