Paul Broad, former director of the Snowy 2 Hydro Project

“80% Renewables by 2030 – Its Bullsh*t”: Former Snowy 2 Pumped Hydro Boss Slams Aussie Green Energy Plans

Essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Climate Realists of Five Dock, JoNova; “… you were being realistic and they didn’t want to hear it. …” – Aussie climate and energy minister Chris Bowen has been accused of ignoring criticism of his green energy fantasies.

From the transcript;

… We can’t make this transition to we absolutely convinced we what we’ve got. The alternative is going to work. There’s going to be at a price point that it won’t kill the economy. At the moment, we’ve got neither of those.

Mark Colvin: you say the idea of getting to 80% renewables by 2030 is complete BS. You say closer to 80 years?

Yeah, well, you’ve got to build these things. You know, transmissionlines.

They say their own reports say you’ll need 82.0 or their equivalents12.1, 2.8, eight, ten years. So get eight. I can do my math. It’s got tobe 80, 70. So you’ll be another generation before anything like.

Anything like.

What they’re talking about occurs.

We know it’s never too late to learn a lesson. What would you say to Chris Bowen if he’s listening this morning?

Oh, take a big good and take.

A big, deep breath. You know, you’re a minister now. You’ve got responsibilities. You’ve got to you’ve got to put it all on the line and you’ve got to be you’ve got you’ve got to be honest to everybody about it. …

Listen to the interview or read the transcript:

WUWT recently reported on the timetable and budget blowouts, but what this reveals is far worse.

Paul Broad, the man who ran the Snowy 2 project from 2013 to 2022, has accused the Australian Government of basing their entire green energy transition plan on fantasies.

Australia’s Climate and Energy Minister Chris Bowen appears to be the chief fantasist. Bowen has repeatedly revealed his terrifying ignorance of energy matters, like when he told Australians we can store electricity like water.

If Paul Broad is right, and someone who managed a major energy project for 10 years probably knows a few things about electricity and engineering, the future of the Australian electricity grid is in the hands of headstrong and ignorant fools. I believe the Aussie energy grid, or at least the East Coast side of the grid, is now headed for an inevitable crash.

The real world, the laws of physics, the vagaries of renewables, they don’t care about the fantasies of politicians. The trail of economic wreckage, from forced power cutbacks and factory power cuts due to grid shortfalls, has only just begun. Sooner or later, one fossil fuel plant closure too many will bring down the grid.

5 27 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 4, 2023 6:07 pm

What would you say to Chris Bowen if he’s listening this morning?

Resign, walk away, leave politics now before you completely destroy the country.

Bryan A
Reply to  SteveG
May 4, 2023 8:51 pm

The only way ANY nation will make anything close to 80% renewables by 2030 is to retire 90% of their fossil fleet and ration the pittance that remains

Reply to  Bryan A
May 4, 2023 9:00 pm

Live Load data from Grid operator Transpower NZ showing renewables are 90% at 05 May 2023 15:00

No tricks with interconnectors either
geography is kind even with wind at 2.6%

But your comment generally for those with coal or gas base generation in the 70% it is impossible by 2030 , and unlikely even by 2050

Reply to  Duker
May 4, 2023 9:30 pm

Great news! What’s your plan for building a large mountain range and high rainfall around all the world’s population centres?

Nick Stokes
Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 4, 2023 10:06 pm

OK, here is South Australia, right now. No mountains, no rainfall. 71% renewables. It won’t be hard to get that to 80% by 2030.

comment image

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 10:25 pm

SA – Home of the big battery, otherwise known as Hornsdale Power Reserve. Owned and operated I think by a French company.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 10:52 pm

That’s great Nick, what’s it like at midnight?
And on other days wind has been near zero, so your “point” as usual if worthless. You can’t (cost effectively) build a reliable grid scale electricity system based on highly variable inputs without massive storage or fast to spin up backup (gas and diesel for SA).

A few weeks ago on another forum someone made the bold claim that wind generation would never fall below 10% of nameplate due to the geo distribution of generation (which of course leads to the massive power transmission costs required to ship and coalesce these relatively small scale generators and ship to power anywhere it might be needed).

Within 24 hours the total Australian wind generation had fallen to 7.8% of nameplate capacity. Of course when I pointed this out the normal squealing occurred, inclusive of accusations that I am sponsored by fossil fuel companies. The loonies were effectively shouting at numbers they didn’t like and needing to deflect from reality by incanting their moronic bogeymen.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 11:15 pm

And here it is in the rest of Australia

Still doable, Nick?

Screenshot 2023-05-05 071425.jpg
Writing Observer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 12:15 am

I do have to admire your patience – waiting until you could get that perfect snapshot.

Now show us the other 8,579 hours and 59 minutes of the year.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Writing Observer
May 5, 2023 7:44 am

Yep the greenies were all cockahoop when wind in the UK achieved 21 GW on Jan 10th 2023, it’s highest output ever, and ignored the fact that it was only during a one hour period.

But that figure will be trotted out as proving unreliables work.

Iain Reid
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 12:21 am


open the interconnectors to adjacent states and see how long it runs.
Scots in the U.K. mak ethe same mistake in claiming Scotland is 80% renewable. You cannot run a grid on high percentages of renewabless and expect it to stay live.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 12:30 am

Show us again during the evening peak, you know, that time of day when the sun isn’t doing much and all those consumers switch on their ovens, tvs, etc.

And then tell us where the storage is going to be.

Your data grab is not telling the whole picture. And you know it.

Reply to  Eng_Ian
May 5, 2023 12:41 am


Last edited 26 days ago by SteveG
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 12:49 am

Interconnectors are cheating

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 1:31 am

7 days of South Australian electricity production. If you zoom in you can see little blue flecks where batteries buffer an RE load spike. Orange is gas, purple is imported electricity. Screenshot 5/5/2023

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 1:48 am

I don’t understand either the chart or the argument, not sure which. Maybe both?

Does the chart show generation by fuel type at 15.05 on May 5?

If so, it has no bearing on whether the 80% target is feasible. To show that you would have to have a chart showing a month or more of generation by fuel type.

If that is what it is showing, its showing the major problem in the way of an 80% target anywhere in the world using wind and solar technology.

Its intermittency, and no method of overcoming it has yet been shown to be either feasible or affordable.

Reply to  michel
May 5, 2023 3:45 am

It MUST be feasible and affordable. Wind and Sun are “free”. “Experts” have told us that teh sun is always shining….somewhere, and the wind is always blowing……somewhere..LOL!!

Bryan A
Reply to  Duker
May 4, 2023 10:14 pm

It’s one thing to be able to make the grade at a certain hour on a certain day during prime generation time (solar is just ebbing and afternoon winds are picking up) and another all together to be able to do so 24/7/365.

My Dodge Durango gets 8-10 MPG traveling east on CA 80 heading uphill to Donner Pass Summit but IF I am traveling west down hill from the Donner Pass Summit I am getting over 40MPG. I don’t plan to be always getting 40MPG as my average is still 10MPG. Just because I got 40+MPG I don’t convince myself that I can get that mileage every time every place.

Just because renewables manage to achieve 90% one hour of one day doesn’t mean they can every hour of every day

Last edited 27 days ago by Bryan A
Reply to  Bryan A
May 5, 2023 12:53 am

Yes . They get 90% mid afternoon , but I think its averages 80% over normal usage .

The secret sauce is hydro and geothermal

Bryan A
Reply to  Duker
May 6, 2023 8:05 am

Kudos for NZ. Not many places have access to affordable geothermal or areas where Hydro can be placed. Of course Hydro only counts because EcoNutz have relented on it NOT being renewable.

Last edited 25 days ago by Bryan A
Iain Reid
Reply to  Duker
May 5, 2023 12:18 am


NZ has large hydro capacity, few countries have or can build that. Hydro is completely different to wind, solar, wave or tidal in that it’s not intermittent, is synchronous, has inertia and reactive power. Renewables are intermittent and have none of the essential qualities I mention for a stable grid

Your last sentence is right but you probably are unaware that because of what I mentioned in the technical requirements, fossil fuel generators must run in parallel with renewables even if that means runing at very low output. I.e. two systems doing one job.

Last edited 26 days ago by Iain Reid
Reply to  Iain Reid
May 5, 2023 12:56 am

Yes. I agree. The issue as the former head of Snowy River pointed out is what should be called unreliable renewables
NZ seems to have 2 types of reliable renewables which are synchronous : hydro and geothermal

Reply to  Iain Reid
May 5, 2023 8:34 am

Yes, it’s all about what elements and processes you can have CONTROL over.

Wind & solar just can’t be conscripted into the mix for that essential reason.

Reply to  Duker
May 5, 2023 1:33 am

This is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

The problem is intermittency. The characterization of it is that you may meet 90% of demand at 15.00 on 5 May 2023. But a few hours or days later you may be down below 10%.

Classic example in the UK. In the last few days wind has varied from 15GW to below 1GW. Below 1GW for about 15-18 hours.

This is from an installed base of 28GW. There are fairly frequent one week periods when there is less than 5GW.

You cannot get there from here. Governments are going to have to choose between three alternatives. The first is they in effect abandon the Net Zero project and deliver reliable supply. To do this, and keep on with the pretence of renewables, they install enough gas to supply demand, in addition to installing the wind and solar.

This is actually not backing up wind and solar. Its running a grid on gas generation, supplemented by wind and solar. The claim from some (including Nick Stokes) is that the installation of the wind and solar is justified by the fuel savings. I don’t believe it till I see a properly costed case.

The second possibility is that the Net Zero project is abandoned, and a new fleet of super heated coal fired plants, and nuclear plants, is installed. This too will deliver reliable power, I think a lot cheaper than the first possibility, including fuel costs. But I can’t see it happening.

The third possibility, which looks like where we are headed, is that governments insist on converting generation to wind and solar while at the same time converting transport and home heating to electricity. The result is blackouts, power rationing, and economic contraction. Because of intermittency. It is not possible to make the intermittent supply reliable and still hit Net Zero. So if you hit Net Zero the price you pay is a lot less power and a lot less reliability, and if you have made transport and home heating dependent on these unreliable supplies, you have a major economic and social problem. But this is where we are headed/

Reply to  michel
May 5, 2023 3:54 am

The third possibility, which looks like where we are headed, is that governments insist on converting generation to wind and solar while at the same time converting transport and home heating to electricity. 

…A gross underestimate of what nutty governments, unelected bureaucrats and eco-zealots want. It is TOTAL decarbonization of the planet. Everything, no coal, no gas, no oil. – Oh – and no nuclear. Now make the planet’s human species survive on sun and wind.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  michel
May 5, 2023 8:02 am

Re your third possibility. The wind industry in Europe has been making large losses for some time now and has said it does not have the capacity to meet the EC’s latest ambitions.

Wind Europe press release 16th March 2023

“We simply don’t have enough factories and infrastructure today to build and install the volumes Europe wants” (Wind Europe CEO Giles Dickson)

Note this is in relation to the EC’s recently announced targets for 2030.

Bryan A
Reply to  Duker
May 6, 2023 8:02 am

Fortunately for NZ they have access to reasonably affordable Geothermal and the EcoNutZeros have relented on Hydro. This is the only reason they can claim anything near 90%…
Current usage

Power Generation (as at) 07 May 2023 02:00
Battery 0 MW
Co-Gen 77 MW
Coal 0 MW
Gas 196 MW
Geothermal 789 MW
Hydro 2084 MW
Liquid 0 MW
Wind 175 MW
Most places won’t have access to “Affordable Geothermal” or available places for Hydro storage. Most places will only have Wind and Solar of which NZ has 5% Wind capacity and 0% Solar in the mix…according to your link (and as indicated above…it’s night and solar is ZERO at night)

Reply to  SteveG
May 5, 2023 6:31 am

Or FOAD as it is known.

Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 6:11 pm

“Paul Broad, the man who ran the Snowy 2 project from 2013 to 2022”

Wonderful, isn’t it? Just yesterday, this was the Green project that was in all kinds of mess, stuck borer etc. Today the man who got us there is a hero, because he said something WUWT likes.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 6:20 pm

You clearly know nothing about project management, Stokes.

Reply to  Streetcred
May 4, 2023 6:30 pm

but he knows a lot of minutia about “the grid” – apparently.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Streetcred
May 4, 2023 6:52 pm

So are you saying that Eric is wrong in telling of
the man who ran the Snowy 2 project

I see here you described the project as The Snowy Project debacle is no surprise, a government project with little planning and gross management incompetence. SNAFU.
Nothing to do with Mr Broad?

Last edited 27 days ago by Nick Stokes
Bryan A
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 4, 2023 9:00 pm

Are there current Global supplies of renewables (Solar Panels and Wind Turbines) in production (including current potential production up to 2028) that would allow Australia to replace current FF Gen with fossil free sources and still allow the rest of the world to continue Non FF growth as well?
Remembering that wind is at best case 34% capacity and solar is at best 22% but as low as 16% in winter and always 0% for 16-18 hours every single 24 hour period.
You need to build 500% – 800% over capacity AND install thousands of TWh back-up batteries to cover the low points that can run Weeks

Last edited 27 days ago by Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 6:24 pm

Well Nick, he like lots of appointees to taxpayer-funded vanity projects (this one was Mal Turnbull’s), eventually experience that epiphany moment where they accept that they’re trying to achieve “mission impossible”, and quit while they can still pivot to rationality.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 4, 2023 9:47 pm

I’m not particularly concerned with who has what target. I think they are devices to keep us moving in the right direction. Here is a plot of the world growth of wind and solar to date.

comment image

I predict that growth will continue until renewables are the dominant generation source everywhere, with solar continuing its faster growth. I predict we will continue using gas as long as we need it, but its use could well diminish to very little as systems like pumped hydro develop further.

Confidence in these predictions is based, not so much on people’s ability to continue to focus on the health of the planet, but on the hard economics, on one basic reality, cost of fuel.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 9:56 pm

Cost of rising interest on borrowed government-mandated taxpayer subsidies for w&s capital will slow down their growth before fuel comparisons suggest an advantage over gas.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 11:05 pm

Nick, you may well be right that renewables will continue to increase. However, Global energy consumption since 1800 by Smil (2020) has been characterized by the expansion of all power sources and is dominated by the overwhelming expansion since 1970 of thermodynamically competent sources of energy, such as coal, oil, natural gas and fissile uranium. In recent decades less efficient solar and wind power have increased to 5% and may reach 10% by 2050. Increasing energy use still dominated by fossil fuels, is expected to continue through to 2100 and average life expectancy extend to at least 80 by 2050.


Dave Yaussy
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 6:16 am

Nick, there’s no question that renewables can occasionally provide 100% of a society’s electric power needs with enough wind and solar buildout. The question is what happens when they can’t. When there is no sun and little wind, it doesn’t matter if you’re overbuilt 1000% with wind turbines and solar panels, you still have no power.

That means batteries or back up, and you have to figure that in the cost of renewables. That won’t change over whatever time period you are talking about, one or the other always will be needed. So how do you calculate that cost?

You’re clearly a very smart man, so you know the problem. What is the cost of the solution?

Mark BLR
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 8:45 am

Here is a plot of the world growth of wind and solar to date.

Those OWID graphics both include the phrase :
“Source : BP Statistical Review of World Energy (2022)”

NB : BP normally release that document at the end of June or the beginning of July each year. Like OWID I’ll use last year’s dataset, up to calendar year 2021.

While OWID talk about wind and solar “energy” production, which should include transport and (space and food) heating applications, they are actually only referring to electricity production (in TWh).

The “relevant” data from my copy of BP’s “Data” spreadsheet, downloaded at the beginning of last July, is attached below.

Last edited 26 days ago by Mark BLR
Mark BLR
Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 9:04 am

I predict that growth will continue until renewables are the dominant generation source everywhere, with solar continuing its faster growth.

To get a better idea of just how realistic that “prediction” is, let’s limit our viewpoint to just electricity production, rather than “(primary) energy production (/ consumption”.

The OWID graph has 2021 numbers of ~1000 TWh of “solar energy” and ~1800 TWh of “wind energy”.

While that sounds terribly impressive, look more closely at what fraction of the world’s total electricity production that actually represents in the attached graph.

Look at the growth in both coal and gas generation, and compare it to the absolute levels of solar’s “faster growth” numbers.

Confidence in these predictions is based, not so much on people’s ability to continue to focus on the health of the planet, but on the hard economics, on one basic reality, cost of fuel.

And my personal “confidence” that your rosy optimism is misplaced is based on the “one basic reality” of looking at the “Total electricity production” curve, listening to the exhortations to replace cars with BEVs and gas boilers with heat pumps, and seeing just how far the ~2800 TWh of “Wind + Solar” is from the current [ pun intended, yes I am that bad a person … ] 28-29,000 TWh of electricity production.

The “one basic reality” is in fact, as the old joke punchline goes, “You can’t get to there from here” …

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 7:05 pm

I see you are still suffering from brain fade Nick.
Just stop and think for a moment , pumped hydro is uneconomic and an exceedingly costly way to provide energy at night and when the wind stops blowing
Surplus energy that is used to pump water up a hill is far greater than what you can ever generate piping that water down the hill to the turbines .
I know that it is surplus power but it becomes very expensive to install and maintain the pumps and the power stations .
New Zealand generates the majority of our electricity from hydro power stations that can be turned on and off remotely as the wind blows and wanes .
The system works well with some geothermal stations which are used as base load .
The greens and Labour will wreck Australia’s economy if they cause firms to shut down and move offshore because of intermittent electricity .
Are your politicians so dumb that they don’t know where you are selling all your coal to .
China and India who are expanding their coal fired power stations and their steel making furnaces with China now consuming over 5.3 BILLION tonnes of coal which is more than than the world used just 14 years ago
The question that I asking Nick is how can the heavy industry leaving Australia help reduce world emissions?
Many countries are harming their standard of living attempting to go nut zero when emission leakage to Asia is actually increasing world emissions.
It does not add up and western countries have to tell the UN that they are not going to wreck their standard of living when Asian countries are ignoring the Paris Accord .

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Graham
May 5, 2023 5:19 am

Many Americans think we should kick the UN out of the country! That’s an old idea that I never agreed with until it started pushing this crazy climate cult. It’s never accomplished much so I think we can do without it.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 7:16 pm

SO tell us why the government didn’t listen.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 4, 2023 8:49 pm

Paul Broad isn’t lauded as a hero here, the fact that he is telling the truth about the issues rather than toeing the government/climate crazies line is being acknowledge as a welcome breath of fresh air.

Relax, we’ll do the same for you if you ever actually do something that remotely looks like subjective science.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 5, 2023 5:21 am

It might be interesting if Nick ever says what his profession is.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 6, 2023 6:21 am

“if Nick ever says what his profession is”

‘Idiot’ … currently looking for a village he hasn’t been thrown out of !!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 6, 2023 8:02 am

He’s stated it before. He’s a PhD, and does computational fluid dynamics, or something very close, going from memory.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
May 5, 2023 2:08 am

What has Mr Broad said which is false?

Thank you Stokes, for furnishing such a clear example of the Left’s standard tactic for countering inconvenient facts: smear the reputation of the person making the assertion without actually attempting to argue the point.

Now push off.

May 4, 2023 6:12 pm

What happened to Mark Steyn and Jo Nova on submarine volcanoes?

It’s still on her website.

Last edited 27 days ago by Milo
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 4, 2023 6:36 pm


Regardless of opinions on the climatic significance of volcanic eruptions, IMO it’s a topic worthy of discussion and consideration, as is evidence of the plethora of submarine volcanoes.

Last edited 27 days ago by Milo
May 4, 2023 6:19 pm

Does that transcript make any sense ? Indicates a politician devoid of any clue.

Reply to  Streetcred
May 4, 2023 7:42 pm

That about sums it up.

Peta of Newark
May 4, 2023 7:01 pm

Sounds like Chris Bowen and the UK’s Chris Stark were cast in the same mould.

I’ve ‘been in the same room’ as Stark, he’s becoming a regular feature of ‘Green Eco Energy’ presentations at the Uni of Leeds and I, as an alumni, get first dibs on tickets to go.

To describe him you need actual experience of people who are actively miles-high on Cocaine – they are so equally full of themselves and full of BS.

They talk rapidly and have what appears to be masses of self-confidence but, because you/anybody cannot ever get a word in edgewise, it is diametrically opposite.
The relentless/unstoppable high-speed flow of verbiage & BS is a shield to protect something that is quite devoid of all it claims to be.

They are empty and fake – it’s entirely obvious that The Drug is doing the talking. But there is only one real drug (Dopamine) and everything we call ‘drugs’ are merely Dopamine Release Agents
After a while those release agents destroy their user, physically and mentally,- (hence BoJo and Brandon) but they always leave a trail of destruction in their wake

Tom Halla
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 4, 2023 7:13 pm

Being bipolar, and untreated, will give the same impression as someone on nose candy or uppers.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 5, 2023 2:11 am

That would explain Michael Gove’s strange, bulging eyes and unblinking stare.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Peta of Newark
May 5, 2023 5:24 am

“They talk rapidly and have what appears to be masses of self-confidence but, because you/anybody cannot ever get a word in edgewise, it is diametrically opposite.”

So unlike many AGW skeptics, like Lindzen and Koonin- who are very congenial, don’t talk fast, and allow others to ask tough questions.

May 4, 2023 7:31 pm

Story Tip — I’m sure this will make it to WUWT.

Australia to possibly post its first budget surplus in 15 years == on the back of surging tax revenues from iron ore — coal and gas. Plenty of story links out there.

I’ve posted links here before relating to massive profits by Woodside eta al. As a result, billions of dollars in revenue to the federal government.

You gotta love fossil fuels.!!

……….of course the greens would shut down all FF industries today if they could..

Jeff Alberts
May 4, 2023 7:46 pm

 We can’t make this transition to we absolutely convinced we what we’ve got.”

Can someone translate that into English?

Rod Evans
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
May 4, 2023 10:37 pm

Maybe the reference to ‘Snowy mountain’ was a hint to why his brain mouth interactivity are not working as they should.

May 4, 2023 8:46 pm

The modern conception of the historical Green energy alternative requires environmental arbitrage before and after the fact, and to spread a blight near, far, and through blue water.

That said, we should, narrowly, distinguish between Green Blight and distributed Green with hydrocarbon and nuclear backup.

Last edited 27 days ago by n.n
May 4, 2023 8:58 pm

Don’t forget, they haven’t even costed the upgrades to the Transmission Lines that they plan to have completed by 2030. They don’t even know how many kms of transmission lines they need to build:

This being government, I would be surprised if they had got as far as scoping the work, let alone costing it by 2030. Then, the costs will triple (because government).

May 4, 2023 9:02 pm

To be fair to Chris Bowen, his performance in this portfolio matches his efforts in every other area he’s been responsible for.

In the 2019 election after helping “architect” one of the dumbest changes to the taxation of share income and housing investment Mr Bowen responded to the electorate with “If you don’t like our policies, don’t vote for us”, and the electorate took his advice and rejected him and his party.

He is as dumb as rocks.

Reply to  harryfromsyd
May 4, 2023 11:13 pm

Thats not fair to rocks! As a geologist I object to this unfair treatment, Sob!

Reply to  bobclose
May 5, 2023 4:00 am

Dumb as a bag of hammers? – F!@k it, not fair on tradies. Dumb as a {insert one’s choice}..

Gunga Din
Reply to  SteveG
May 5, 2023 8:16 am


Chris Hanley
May 4, 2023 9:50 pm

When there is a ministry of ‘climate change and energy’ it will be stacked with activists and shills for wind and solar investors, there’s nothing surer.
Bowen Minister for Climate Change and Energy does not know what he is doing, he is driven by his department and those driving his department are pushing Australia into the sunk cost trap where Germany and UK now find themselves.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
May 5, 2023 4:06 am

One ministry for “climate change” and energy. No prizes for guessing where Australia’s energy generation priorities are.

May 4, 2023 9:56 pm

Nut-zero writ large-
Snowy 2.0 an ‘absolute disaster’: Chris Kenny | Snowy hydro an absolute disaster, says Sky News host Chris Kenny. Watch the full episode at | By Sky News Australia | Facebook (
It’s an international competition to see who can be the most stupid ignorant Gretahead.

Rod Evans
Reply to  observa
May 4, 2023 10:57 pm

There are a lot of entrants in that competition, Observa. I think Joe is out in front leading by an empty head, Other worthy candidates have left the field Arden, Sturgeon, Pelosi, Merkel, May. Their witches brew of toxic green gave them the vapours.
“Fillet of a fenny snake, In the cauldron boil and bake; Eye of newt and toe of frog, Wool of bat and tongue of dog, Adder’s fork and blind-worm’s sting, Lizard’s leg and owlet’s wing, For a charm of powerful trouble, Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.”
Shakespeare had the measure of our modern political class.

Last edited 27 days ago by Rod Evans
Reply to  Rod Evans
May 4, 2023 11:19 pm

I guess Joe and Greta are excused at present due to serious elder abuse but the rest?

May 5, 2023 4:24 am

Climate clown announces more net-zero jobs-
Energy Minister Chris Bowen announces new Net Zero Authority to help transition from coal-fired generation (

Here’s some Transition101 pretty flow charts from Wendy the tax Farmer for the prosumers among you-
Voices of the Valley (

Joseph Zorzin
May 5, 2023 5:05 am

Sooner or later, one fossil fuel plant closure too many will bring down the grid.”

I suspect what they’ll do to not bring down the grid is keeping raising the price until people drastically cut back their demand for electricity. Send the nation’s use of electricity back a century.

May 5, 2023 9:29 am

Umm. Is that interview some kind of special language used in Australia?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights