Sky News Australia
Sky News host Andrew Bolt says it appears another green energy project has “bitten the dust” after it was revealed Broome’s Derby tidal power project has been impacted by lengthy delays. “This now joins so many failures,” he said.
From more on the failures of Intermittent Wind and Solar, go to our ClimateTV page.
At this stage of the game, we have learned to question the word choices for these failures. Is the more direct reason due to uneconomic project reality, material cost inflation, or lack of additional incentives? I don’t think “delay” is right word choice otherwise nuclear projects would not make the cut.
Of course it is a lack of additional incentives. Any technical problem can be solved by signing a check. (Of course, not a personal check 🙂 )
Or even a cheque!
The main problem was getting EPA approval. It does modify the environment.
They did once, in 2013, (suspected), good for 5 years. The economics were so bad they could find enough investors to start construction during the 5 year permit, so approval lapsed. See more detailed comment just below.
What, you expected Nick to tell the whole story?
The link I gave tells the whole story. The fact is that the present blockage is environmental approval.
What doesn’t tell the whole story is the head post.
So, just to be clear, what you’re saying is Greens shot themselves in the foot on this one?
Nothing promoted as “green” ever works properly –
Tim Blair.
No evidence that greens were involved at all. For at least fifty years people have been trying to make money by harnessing tidal energy.
50+ years.
Yes, but the root problem is that there’s no business case for these projects. In the UK the proposed Severn Barrage ran into the same problem. The costs and the engineering issues are just too great. Elsewhere someone refers to the inability to raise funding for the Bay of Fundy proposal. Same thing.
If you can’t get funding for something like this over a five year period, that’s a sign that the case is more than dubious. Even if they get environmental approval this will be the same problem.
Tidal schemes for the Severn were proposed in 1920, 1933, 1944, several times during the 1960s and 1970s and again in 1981. When the projected cost of the latter had risen to £10 bn it was dropped. Similar schemes for the Mersey and Morecambe Bay also came to naught.
As if the environmental tradeoff wasn’t bleeding obvious from the first brainfart Nick. That’s the ongoing hockey stick of energy gained against environmental damage the climate changers are running into with their dilute energy fantasy.
You’ve plucked the low hanging fruit with wind and solar and now the community is waking up to environmental incursion required for the nut zero Utopia. Not least encroaching on productive farming land with ever hungrier wind solar batteries and their Great Transmissioning as the only moderately economic options you have left.
That’s after pissing serious taxpayer resources up against the wall discounting wave tidal geothermal bioenergy and the like. The smug early days of bludging off fossil fuels as cheap insurers for your unreliables daydream are gone and welcome to your serious fallacy of composition problem now.
It is a relatively simple process to revive a lapsed approval. EPA has no problems with bird choppers and solar farms modifying the environment.
Um………. how to pick, how to pick?
Concentrated energy sources that require minimal modification of the environment, or diffuse energy sources that require massive modification of the environment?
LOL.. since when has the EPA been worried about “modifying the environment”
If they did, there would be no wind industrial estates anywhere, and very few solar industrial estates.
“No wind industrial estates anywhere”.
(I have seen the future and it is me).
Geoff S
Was anything said by Bolt incorrect?
Or are you just trying yet another pathetic distraction !
Disaster after disaster… waste and more waste…
That is the greenie agenda you support and shill for.
As someone noted above, there is more to the story.
So nothing you can argue against.. OK.
That was obvious from your petty attempt at distraction.
”…there is more to the story.”
Lol, just like there is more to the story about the EPA approval for thousands of hectares of forest to be flattened to make way for solar and wind farms, together with transmission lines to service them… Hey Nick.
and the old german forest being cleared for a Tesla plant..how DID they manage that?
Nick, I’ve waited for any renewables zealot to answer the question how much is?investment? in renewables is needed to replace thermal sources. There’s a very simple formula to do this calculation for any grid: (Peak Demand / Lowest Renewables Output = Solution)
For ERCOT in Texas that calculation is: (70MW / .8MW = 87.5) Times the then 2021 current ERCOT renewables ?Investment?.
Do you concur or dispute this? Why or How?
I’ve written a much more detailed analysis using four years of hourly data here
Nick, I see you have used your typical trick of deflecting from the subject. your answer has ZERO relevancy to the formula and results I provided.
It is entirely relevant. It says that for the USA48 the cost of entirely replacing FF with W&S, with optimal storage level (costed) is about $5T. That meets the lowest hourly W&S state.
I see you have again doubled down on the deflection. I also noted that you cited this Report: https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WOJICKREPORT.pdf which is a corollary for battery storage using a similar formula to mine above, and which concludes adding battery storage to be astronomically HIGH. All of which is paid by users.
BTW, $5T/~$.5T (annual US sales) = 10 times the annual sales volume. You are ignoring this 10 fold increase? What kind of deluded mind does this?
“You are ignoring this 10 fold increase?”
It isn’t an increase. It is over about 30 years, so it means you spend about a third of revenue (I haven’t checked your figure) on replacing equipment. Which isn’t so far from what is done now, except that the new equipment works with no fuel costs.
Nick, continuing the deflection now claims: “so it means you spend about a third of revenue…” So adding ~1/3 to prices amortized over 30 years is justified to ??? while he ignores the simplest fact that these are all ADDITIONAL costs to then THEN existing grid.
What kind of deluded mind does this? Evidentially, Nicks, and he still has not addressed the simple equation.
I did a little research on Broome before commenting. First proposed in the 1990’s and rejected for environmental risk. Broome lobbied intensely and finally got environmental approval in 2013, good for 5 years to start construction.
Broome promised up to 40 MW for a mere $385 million (AUS)—a very expensive deal—so couldn’t find investors in the 5 years despite promising a ridiculous 120 year life (turbine/generators in salt water!). So the (corrupt) environmental approval lapsed and Broome has been unable to regain it because of ‘obvious’ environmental risks.
So bought off environmental regulators once, but could could not do it twice given the outcry from environmentalists and Aboriginees.
Salt water is remarkably corrosive. The U.S. Navy has battled this problem for 230 years. The ocean is still winning.
Funny, but true, some Japanese product regulations still stipulate compliance with USN salt water test specifications. Apparently it is to simulate rat pee if the device is to be fitted in building voids (eg WiFi routers)
I looked at the project back in 2017. The proposal can be found here
https://web.archive.org/web/20160409080730/http://www.tidalenergyaustralia.com/draftEIS/Appendix%20G_GHD%202012%20Derby%20Tidal%20Power%20Preliminary%20Design%20Report.pdf
I concluded
Simple sum: output is around a third of La Rance, yet cost has to be several times higher for the extra length of barrages and levees and the extra sluices required.
Dredging (and that would likely need to be continuous in view of the mudflats) only adds to the costs.
I have it on very good authority (NOT!) that the reason that most “green energy” power projects fail is that they don’t properly consider—and take to heart—the following:
“So, I think it’s very important, as you have heard from so many incredible leaders, for us at every moment in time — and certainly this one — to see the moment in time in which we exist and are present, and to be able to contextualize it, to understand where we exist in the history and in the moment as it relates not only to the past but the future”
–KH
There ya go.
There are many times when Kamala makes AOC look smart. And that is VERY hard to do.
She was heard to mutter as she left the stage –
“let’s see y’all parse THAT, motherf&%#ers”
“There ya go.”
Fake
You are such an incompetent nitwit, Nick – you couldn’t even get this one right. ToldYouSo posted her actual words from the original speech and you have linked to some faked video that nobody (except you) mentioned. So, not fake, but completely incomprehensible.
The official transcript of the speech that ToldYouSo posted is on the official Whitehouse web page. You can read it here.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/04/25/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-a-political-event-on-reproductive-rights/
It reads –
“at every moment in time, and certainly this one, to see the moment in time in which we exist and are present, and to be able to contextualize it, to understand where we exist in the history and in the moment as it relates not only to the past, but the future.”
Nick, do you have any further nickpicking to add?
I think you should take her seriously but not literally.
Seriously?
roflmao
No Nick… NOBODY should take Kamala seriously.
She is an idiot, portraying herself as an idiot.
Yep:folowing in the Klaus Schwab school of thought – you know, the one Mark Steyn describes as the sinister, Teutonic megalomaniac hiding in plain sight, as a sinister Teutonic megalomaniac.
Like President Donald Trump……..
Nope, not even close!
Typical leftist projection against former President Donald Trump.
Nick, we in the Ole US of A do take here seriously, and it frightens the hell out of us. She’s our VP, and the other idiot is the Prez????
You too should be frightened, because they represent the peak of liberal thought and policy. Regrettably, you are right there with them.
Yes, you frighten us also.
Kamala may be president before too long.
I’m thinking as the heat is turned up on the Biden Crime Family criminality, that ole Joe is going to retire for health reasons in the hope that this will cause the Republicans to back off pursuing Joe’s criminality.
And Republicans just may let him off the hook if he were to resign.
That would leave us with Kamala as president for the few months before the next election.
This would give the Democrats the opportunity to put up other presidential candidates to run against Kamala, and she will lose, of course, so this is the way out for Democrats.
And, I think that if Kamala is president, her every action will be seriously critiqued by both sides, as both sides know she is not up to the job, and the people controlling the Democrat Party will keep her on the radical left “straight and narrow” until the next election.
A president has a LOT of power. And Kamala has a dictator hiding behind that mask of hers. But I don’t think the Democrat puppetmasters will let her get out of control in the short time she is in office, and the Republicans will certainly be questioning every move she makes.
Trump is going to be president in 2025. He is currently leading Biden in the national polls. Get used to it. Celebrate it!
I see where IRS whistelblowers say they have documents showing the Biden’s have off-shore bank accounts.
Oh, my!
Definitely not literally, that’s incomprehensible.
Mr. Stokes: As long as we’re giving free advice, I think you should pick your battles better, the quote is not fake, you have fallen for the fake. Defending Hansen bad, but this??!!
Hear it directly from the horse’s (sic) mouth in this video clip of her speech:
Mr. Stokes: Your response? Your eyes lying to you again?
Hmmmm . . . perhaps Nick is the illegitimate spawn of, dare I say it, . . .
The fellow doth protest too much, methinks.
Nick is the Spawn of Svengoolie?
Nick-pick.. being disingenuous and FAKE as always. !
Found out yet again…
It is almost as if he does it on purpose as a petty attempt at attention.!
The only think fake about what ToldYouSo posted and your drive by response IS your DriveBy Response. The Emboldened word ARE Ms Harris’ exact words
This is ludicrous, the country has vast reserves of coal natural gas and the largest known uranium ore deposit yet it is messing about with hare-brained schemes like this.
Yes, I think it must be a very well thought-out plan to conserve their treasures until they are worth 10 times as much when the rest of the world has used all its resources!
Lang Hancock proposed using the high tides of North West Australia to generate power back in the 1970’s. If the politicians had listened it would have happened back then. Lang also saw that coal was a limited resource and that nuclear energy was ultimately the answer, again where would we be if the politicians had listened back then, but is it going to be too late if they start listening now.
Update, it was in the early 1960’s when surveys were carried out on developing tidal power at Secure Bay.
Strange how decisions to mine are finally approved by politicians, not by the people with the knowledge, skills and funds – that
is, mining professionals.
“Hello shopkeeper, I’d like you to sell me a can of beans, please.”
“Has your purchase been approved by the usual 57 Acronyms?”
“Will 56 do? Fellow named Hines or something is holding out.”
Geoff S
H. John Heinz died in 1991. The people you are thinking about have nothing to do with the Company business. She – Teresa Heinz – is Chair of the Heinz Endowments and the Heinz Family Philanthropies.
funny (or not) how the mine leases up NT are about to end the millions paid to aboriginals, so now theyre all touting for NEW mines there..
theyre only anti when they arent getting the handouts it seems.
meanwhile all the places that DID get the millions still expected ausgov handouts schools medicals housing etc?
Sound familiar?
From half a world away – Nova Scotia Canada – attempts to generate power from the highest tidal range in the world –
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/tidal-power-bay-of-fundy-turbine-electricity-emera-hydro-1.3862227
and
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/tidal-energy-snag-nova-scotia-sustainable-marine-energy-1.6785015
That $30 million was shareholder investments.
We are all going to die. Fortunately, AGW climate myths do not kill. Mostly, old age.
Article in today’s WSJ on the lack of enthusiasm for construction of a natural gas pipeline paralleling the northern part of the Alaska oil pipeline and bringing the gas to Nikiski on the Kenai Peninsula for liquification and sea shipment to east Asia. The Asian countries are uninterested in being financial partners in the endeavor.
“This facility will generate power 24/7, all day every day, cloudy, rainy, overnight, wind, no wind, it will be generating power,” he said.
“There are only two times a month and for very short periods when there are neap tides that it will need a little bit of supplementary power generated.”
Oops!
Listen, Jimmy. Two times each month we have to eat all the ice cream in the freezer, so don’t buy more than we can eat. It won’t kill you to go without frozen snacks a few days. Jimmy, you are 20 years old. Stop crying or I’ll bash you on the head.
I knew I had looked at this scheme before.
https://euanmearns.com/green-mythology-tidal-base-load-power-in-the-uk/#comment-26235
It’s completely uneconomic.
The design can be found here
https://web.archive.org/web/20160409080730/http://www.tidalenergyaustralia.com/draftEIS/Appendix%20G_GHD%202012%20Derby%20Tidal%20Power%20Preliminary%20Design%20Report.pdf
Under the proposed legislation from the totalitarian federal Labor/Green central government in Australia that piece by Bolt and the associated airing of Clauser’s comments would, I have no doubt be defined as “ misinformation”.
“be defined as “ misinformation”.”
ESPECIALLY as everything he said was provably true. !
short story: Innovative solar power-producing bike path considered a failure.
Story tip
Oh dear shuffling EVs around the planet just got a whole lot more unaffordable-
Electric car could be to blame for deadly ship fire (msn.com)
You might want one in the basement carpark of your hi-rise apartment to save the planet but will your ICE cool neighbours want to save up for the insurance tab?
The implications of having millions of lithium powered EVs being used in the same way as ICE cars are currently used are starting to dawn on the political class in the UK.
Parking, and the issue is weight of cars in city parking buildings as well as the fire risk. Fire risk in ferries and Eurostar. Fire risk in the usual UK garages built on the side of houses. Then you have refuel times and shortages of public charge points, which will basically rule out any long distance driving. The price of the things, probably double what ICE cars cost. The insurance issues, when a small fender-bender leads to a writeoff because the battery cannot be shown to have remained safe. The cost of refuelling at public charge points, well more than gasoline.
The bottom line is going to be far fewer cars, and very much restricted use of them, and a lot more expensive.
Countries certainly can move to EVs and ban the sale and eventually the use of ICE cars. But what is gradually starting to dawn on the political class is that this will only be possible at the cost of a huge social upheaval in how people move around, and that will dramatically affect housing, work, shopping… And it will also mean a big fall in disposable income.
Ah well, its to save the burning planet.
now imagine a battery powered plane full of people…and the landing site(s)
I had to drive from Derby to Dundee and back for my elder brother’s funeral earlier this week.
The South of Scotland now has a huge number of turbines despoiling what was once a beautiful area of the country. Then the Beauly – Denny power line passing within a couple of miles of where I used to live.
Both when we went up and when we came back despite most actually turning Gridwatch data showed pitiful amounts of output. So much so that coal has been used, in what is the wettest July on record and not particularly warm either, to produce very small amounts of electricity. It’s not how much they produce on windy days it’s how little on windless days. My teenaged grandson, like many, took a while to grasp the fact that despite turning they may not be doing anything worthwhile
Pre Devolution you could tell when you were in Scotland because the road changed from the M6 motorway to the A74 dual carriageway. Now it’s turbine free Lake District to Turbines hire aka Dumfries and Galloway
Very interesting. My son’s a planning officer in the UK. He used to work at a renewables company and the hypocrisy and double standards of the council environmental teams was legion. One of his latest applications was for a small visitor centre for school parties in the Brecon Beacons National Park (need to call it Bannau Brycheiniog now as Beacons isn’t an environmentally friendly name for some reason). The application was turned down by the council planning committee as the concrete base and plastic double glazing units weren’t considered sustainable. My son muttered sotto voce – you’ll approve windmills with their concrete bases and carbon fibre blades though.
Madness and hypocrisy
“An entrance, captain … but no exit. They go in, but they do not come out.”
– Spock, 2267 (“A Taste of Armageddon“). This is what Nick and the Greenies really want. It would make their domination so much more easy: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Disintegration_station
Bolt nails it again
may i strongly suggest you ALL watch the dr J campbell clip from the list after Bolts ends
1 in 35
yes the number of people who DID show heart damage after Moderna
swiss cardio- non industry study
” ‘When will politicians listen?’: Another green energy project ‘bites the dust’ ”
It’s the economy, stupid!