OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Bandwagon]

The real issue, the one that is so rarely focused upon in these tit for tat kind of arguments is not so much about to use coal or not, it is about having a basis for a consistent bi partisan energy policy that can survive the long term politics, and drive investment through certainty.

The Turnbull government so very nearly achieved this with the NEG, it had the support of the opposition, the states were coming on board, yet it was destroyed from within the government to be replaced by their so called big stick, which is nothing short of cynical grab for votes at the margins as anyone with half a brain would realise that to legislate forced divestment of assets within an industry sector is very much unlikely to encourage investment in that sector

For that alone this government should be turfed out on it's arse and repeatedly flogged with wet copies of it's pathetic attempt and sorting out this mess.

For what it's worth, Labor have pretty much adopted the NEG as it's energy policy to take to the next election, with any luck it can be implemented, and there remains enough support for those that worked on the policy from within the Liberals that it can then stand the test of the electoral cycle.

 

[Bandwagon]

Correct. That’s the argument I am making.

Except I am not confusing steel making with energy production. Two very different things.

Energy is energy, steel making requires a lot of it, that plants produce their own is neither here nor there, it is all part of our energy production needs. However I accept these are two quite distinct parts of the same debate.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

yeah we can argue all day about renewable energy/coal power etc etc and a decade later the politicians are still are doing it, yet the majority of the people want renewable energy (or the issue sorted out):

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...oal-even-at-greater-cost-20180619-p4zmcn.html

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...action-at-its-highest-level-in-a-decade-98625

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...s/news-story/31cd7c6a26e1f829aebc5094febe2480

So if the politicians/government really represented the people of the country they wouId sort out their shit and put something in place and move on to another issue. FFS it’s no wonder the public dislike politicians!!

 

[Gronk]

I was actually responding to this statement which you now appear to be distancing yourself from.

In the context of energy generation.

 

[Gronk]

Is your argument for the purpose for low emissions to reverse/stall the effects of global warming or some other reason?

You don’t need me to sell you the benefits of a low emissions future surely ?

This is NZs blueprint towards being carbon neutral by 2050. Meanwhile the boffins here are still huffing and chuffing, clinging on to the past.

http://theconversation.com/new-zeal...on-charts-course-to-low-emission-future-96281

 

[Chipmunk]

You don’t need me to sell you the benefits of a low emissions future surely ?

This is NZs blueprint towards being carbon neutral by 2050. Meanwhile the boffins here are still huffing and chuffing, clinging on to the past.

http://theconversation.com/new-zeal...on-charts-course-to-low-emission-future-96281

I know about the reasons for low emissions, etc,

Let me ask you two questions for you to ponder.

1. If both Australia and New Zealand combined from tomorrow had 100% renewable energy for it's power generation and reduced it's CO2 emissions to Zero, what affect would this have on global emissions and what would the impact be on reducing global warming?

2. If China from tomorrow had 100% renewable energy for it's power, what affect would this have on Australia's economic position?

 

[Gary Gutful]

Is your argument for the purpose for low emissions to reverse/stall the effects of global warming or some other reason?

It’s to reverse the visible signs of aging.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Energy is energy, steel making requires a lot of it, that plants produce their own is neither here nor there, it is all part of our energy production needs. However I accept these are two quite distinct parts of the same debate.

Agreed.

Most people that oppose coal don’t understand the distinction between the two main types.

Until we find a way to manufacture steel without coal we will be mining the Bowen Basin in Queensland for many years to come.

Thermal coal has a much more limited life span.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I know about the reasons for low emissions, etc,

Let me ask you two questions for you to ponder.

1. If both Australia and New Zealand combined from tomorrow had 100% renewable energy for it's power generation and reduced it's CO2 emissions to Zero, what affect would this have on global emissions and what would the impact be on reducing global warming?

2. If China from tomorrow had 100% renewable energy for it's power, what affect would this have on Australia's economic position?

We all know the answer to those questions.

There will be a transition over time. It won’t happen overnight, but it will heppen.

 

[Chipmunk]

It’s to reverse the visible signs of aging.

Well that's a different story then.

 

[Chipmunk]

We all know the answer to those questions.

There will be a transition over time. It won’t happen overnight, but it will heppen.

Yeh, but it's got to be one-in-all-in or forget about it. There's no point Australia closing down it's 20 odd coal fired power stations and moving to renewables if the Chinese have plans to build 700 more and there are plans to build another 1600 across the globe. It's a pointless exercise and we'll be the losers in the long run....although our economy should still be strong with the amount of coal we'll be selling.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Yeh, but it's got to be one-in-all-in or forget about. There's no point Australia closing down it's 20 odd coal fired power stations if China has plans to build 700 more and there are plans to build another 1600 across the globe. It's a pointless exercise and we'll be the losers in the long run.

Yep. That’s fairly clear at this point.

 

[Gronk]

Yeh, but it's got to be one-in-all-in or forget about it. There's no point Australia closing down it's 20 odd coal fired power stations and moving to renewables if the Chinese have plans to build 700 more and there are plans to build another 1600 across the globe. It's a pointless exercise and we'll be the losers in the long run....although our economy should still be strong with the amount of coal we'll be selling.

Well I don’t buy that. Most of the high GDP ranked countries in the World are making an effort. Pressure needs to be placed (and financial assistance provided where appropriate) on the emerging economies to transition away from the use of coal and towards alternative low emission power generation. You will see from this very cool map below that there are a shit tonne of power stations being wound down. Anyone who limps towards transition with an one-in-all-in model knows it will never happen in our or or childrens lifetimes and frankly does not take the concept or perceived threat seriously. Cop out. F**king get it done idiots.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants

 

[Gary Gutful]

Well I don’t buy that. Most of the high GDP ranked countries in the World are making an effort. Pressure needs to be placed (and financial assistance provided where appropriate) on the emerging economies to transition away from the use of coal and towards alternative low emission power generation. You will see from this very cool map below that there are a shit tonne of power stations being wound down. Anyone who limps towards transition with an one-in-all-in model knows it will never happen in our or or childrens lifetimes and frankly does not take the concept or perceived threat seriously. Cop out. F**king get it done idiots.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants

I hope we have very clear economic plan for the country before we would do this ourselves.

Sadly though, that isn’t a prerequisite to getting the votes of details poor ‘urban greens’.

 

[Chipmunk]

Well I don’t buy that. Most of the high GDP ranked countries in the World are making an effort. Pressure needs to be placed (and financial assistance provided where appropriate) on the emerging economies to transition away from the use of coal and towards alternative low emission power generation. You will see from this very cool map below that there are a shit tonne of power stations being wound down. Anyone who limps towards transition with an one-in-all-in model knows it will never happen in our or or childrens lifetimes and frankly does not take the concept or perceived threat seriously. Cop out. F**king get it done idiots.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants

I notice when you put the bar to Future on the carbonbrief mapping tool, there is a shit load of purple and pink for under construction or planned. From what I've read there are plans for a 43% incease in the power genererated from coal across the globe. Just look at that statistic for a second and reality soon hits. 43% increase in the planned use of coal power!!!...staggering really

Whilst there is money to be made from building coal fired power stations, the Chinese companies and others who plan to build the 1600 coal fired power stations planned across the globe, they will continue to build them.

Do you think we would stop mining and selling them the coal even if we had no intention of using it ourselves? I doubt it.

 

[Bandwagon]

It's worth noting that most of our coal fired generation assets are at or near end of life, so will require either replacement or major refurbishment in order to keep going.

It's also worth noting that the way in which our wholesale markets relate to how much we pay from our retailer is influenced far more by the cost of gas generation than it is coal, or indeed renewables, as gas sets the base cost price because at present it is the most expensive. This is because neither coal nor renewables provide enough power at pretty much any given time, and the way the spot market works means that the last bid sets the price, which ultimately more often than not is gas because it is making up the shortfall.

And despite the fact we are now producing more gas than ever before, we are competing with world markets in terms of price, and unlike so many other countries we have not legislated a reserve amount of that for national consumption, so OS contracts are written based upon only production and export constraints, resulting in the price being set based upon scarcer availability.

Now I'll gladly concede that the above is my take on what I understand of what is a f**king clusterf**k of a system to get a handle on, and it's probably over simplistic of how the NEM works ( or really f**king doesn't in my view ) But I guess my point goes back to my previous post, it aint as simple as we are being sold, and the system it's self needs to be overhauled in a bi partisan way if any action is going to have any real effect on what we pay, and the means by which it's generated is the least of our problems when it comes to the cost to consumers.

Scare tactics over the method of generation only serve to distract from the failures of government over the last decade to keep pace with a changing world and the realities that has brought.

Don't believe the hype.

 

[Gary Gutful]

It's worth noting that most of our coal fired generation assets are at or near end of life, so will require either replacement or major refurbishment in order to keep going.

It's also worth noting that the way in which our wholesale markets relate to how much we pay from our retailer is influenced far more by the cost of gas generation than it is coal, or indeed renewables, as gas sets the base cost price because at present it is the most expensive. This is because neither coal nor renewables provide enough power at pretty much any given time, and the way the spot market works means that the last bid sets the price, which ultimately more often than not is gas because it is making up the shortfall.

And despite the fact we are now producing more gas than ever before, we are competing with world markets in terms of price, and unlike so many other countries we have not legislated a reserve amount of that for national consumption, so OS contracts are written based upon only production and export constraints, resulting in the price being set based upon scarcer availability.

Now I'll gladly concede that the above is my take on what I understand of what is a f**king clusterf**k of a system to get a handle on, and it's probably over simplistic of how the NEM works ( or really f**king doesn't in my view ) But I guess my point goes back to my previous post, it aint as simple as we are being sold, and the system it's self needs to be overhauled in a bi partisan way if any action is going to have any real effect on what we pay, and the means by which it's generated is the least of our problems when it comes to the cost to consumers.

Scare tactics over the method of generation only serve to distract from the failures of government over the last decade to keep pace with a changing world and the realities that has brought.

Don't believe the hype.

Still predominantly focused on energy...

 

[Bandwagon]

Still predominantly focused on energy...

Sorry, what are you saying?

 

[Gary Gutful]

Sorry, what are you saying?

I am saying that you continue to be focused on energy.

I know it was confusing, but I suggested this by posting “still predominantly focused on energy...”

 

[Bandwagon]

I am saying that you continue to be focused on energy.

I know it was confusing, but I suggested this by posting “still predominantly focused on energy...”

Ah ok,

Is this not a discussion that ultimately revolves around energy, it;s costs and it's availability?