Yo someone redpill me on the aus policy on coal to solar/wind (5 Viewers)

[SnowBogan]

You seem pretty educated on the topic so I was wondering, is the rhetoric regarding the creation of the renewable farms producing more CO2 than the plants remove true or not?

It's bit of a loaded question. What's the time frame for measurement? We've had wind farms operating for close to 30 years in some areas. Are we looking at the 6 months of heavy diesel equipment used in building the farm or the impact spread out over three decades?

A more nuanced answer is

- over the life of a wind farm there will be less CO2 produced compared to fossil fuels
- the technologies are improving rapidly where the original 0.2MW turbines are relatively 'dirty' compared to newer 17MW turbine
- same with solar panels. Efficiency (conversion to electricity) used to be less than 10%. Current panels are 21%, and newly developed panels hit 47%
- once a solar farm is built, the process of swapping out panels for more efficient models is quick and easy
- wind turbines and solar panels are getting bigger, cheaper, and more efficient. Even without the climate argument, it's simply getting to the point where the economics tilt in favour of renewables.

Anyone making an argument that renewables create more CO2 than fossil fuels usually has to cherry pick some very specific details and ignore the more nuanced answer in order to make it a culture war issue. I'm old enough to remember people saying mobile phones were a fad items and would never replace a landline because the batteries were big and heavy and needed to recharge every couple of hours. Same with computers. They'll never replace a typewriter because a typewriter doesn't need a power cord and will never 'crash'.

 

[Superax]

You know maybe a bit of a silly question but I’m still surprised at the fact that we’ve been able to successfully build a hydrogen bomb almost 100 years ago now yet we still don’t have the capacity to store all the solar we’re able to make…

 

[LHV]

You know maybe a bit of a silly question but I’m still surprised at the fact that we’ve been able to successfully build a hydrogen bomb almost 100 years ago now yet we still don’t have the capacity to store all the solar we’re able to make…

Power is a commodity, it's subject to supply and demand and price affects both. The technology exists now to store all the surplus power we generate. We could also be zero emissions using current technologies. But no-one could afford their power bill. In fact people can't afford their power bills now and we haven't even done the heavy lifting on renewables generation yet

 

[Superax]

Power is a commodity, it's subject to supply and demand and price affects both. The technology exists now to store all the surplus power we generate. We could also be zero emissions using current technologies. But no-one could afford their power bill. In fact people can't afford their power bills now and we haven't even done the heavy lifting on renewables generation yet

Yeah I completely understand all that I’m just surprised that we had all the power available to light up the entire world in the 1980’s yet somehow in 2024 there’s an energy crisis.

A country like Australia full of natural resources should not be at a point where energy is an issue or becomes unaffordable for people..

 

[Alian]

Yeah I completely understand all that I’m just surprised that we had all the power available to light up the entire world in the 1980’s yet somehow in 2024 there’s an energy crisis.

A country like Australia full of natural resources should not be at a point where energy is an issue or becomes unaffordable for people..

Because it's political. Other energy rich countries like Qatar, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, Nigeria have extremely cheap electricity prices.

Depending on which source you use, we range from the 2nd to 4th largest exporter of coal and 3rd or second largest exporter of gas.

We are exporting energy to countries who are using our resources to provide their nation citizens cheaper electricity prices then what we give to ourselves.

 

[CCGrinder]

Without household batteries to store your solar panels energy you are essentially farming energy for the company and buying it back at an absorbent rate..my neighbour had a written contract which he signed and later fought the company and won he still gets 22 cents per kWh from the panels

 

[LHV]

Yeah I completely understand all that I’m just surprised that we had all the power available to light up the entire world in the 1980’s yet somehow in 2024 there’s an energy crisis.

A country like Australia full of natural resources should not be at a point where energy is an issue or becomes unaffordable for people..

Australia’s situation is due to mismanagement and feckless climate policies. It’s certainly can’t be blamed on climate science because climate science doesn’t require you to implement stupid policies that make your grid increasingly expensive and unreliable while not changing the weather. Two simple policy shifts would make huge improvements. (1) Encourage people and businesses to use renewables plus storage to exit the grid altogether, rather than contribute to congestion as everyone tries to plug in the same stuff at the same time (eg rooftop solar which is now a problem for the grid not a solution). (2) Make generators who want to sell to the grid provide a reliability guarantee (eg they want to provide 100MW they have to guarantee 100MW 24/7) which gets rid of the subsidy sharks who don’t actually want to provide power for sale but just milk the taxpayer and promotes the most efficient packets of technology (eg wind or solar don’t get a look in because they’re too unreliable but wind + solar + gas is guaranteed a slot)

 

[SnowBogan]

People have touched on a few relevant issues in this post, including crappy govt policies that screw the working class.

We really need to parse the issues into the various components, rather than saying the govt is screwing us therefore the technology is bad. The individual issues are:-

- renewables are getting much cheaper and much more efficient. They are now more cost effective than nuclear and fossil fuels

- base load power (coal and gas) needs to be maintained for when renewables aren’t up to the task, but it’s better (and cheaper) to run a coal plant at 20% for 300 days per year while maintaining the ability to turn it up to 90% when needed

- nuclear is a good option but should have been implemented 40 years ago. Implementing it now will be slow and expensive

- our power costs are high but don’t need to be. This isn’t because of the cost of renewables, it’s because big business always makes money off the working class

 

[SnowBogan]

Why renewables are a win for conservatives

I'm conservative. Small government, personal responsibility, freedom and national security.

As many have pointed out - we're getting screwed on our power bills. The govt controls the supply network and is in bed with the power companies to fix prices in a way that profits big business and the govt. I fill my car and half the money goes to the govt in taxes and a good portion ends up in the Middle East where it's funding Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hezbollah etc.

As a conservative my dream scenario is independence. Solar panels on my house charging banks of batteries in my walls and roof - enough to run my household with some in reserve for cloudy days. My TV, dishwasher, kitchen, lights etc - all running off my own power supply. I love my V8 car but my petrol purchases fund things I do not support. An electric vehicle run off my own supply would mean I could stop emptying my wallet into the govt coffers every week.

I'd love to be able to disconnect the power line to my house and bid farewell to power bills forever. That's freedom.

I see a future where every house in my town does the same. Instead of ten local petrol stations - eight of them go out of business and we're left with just two boutique fuel stations where every few months I buy enough fuel to take my Harley out for a spin. I can source some locally produced natural gas to run my generator when needed in case my battery levels drop, but ideally I'll top my tank up every six months which keeps local producers in business while shutting out international predators.

As demand for petrol drops - the Middle Eastern economy collapses. I no longer see Saudi Princes and clowns like MBS flying on private jets with golden toilets. The Iranian religious regime is overthrown and is returned to it's pre-1980 society. Funding for Hezbollah and Hamas dries up and royal families across the region go into exile as popular uprisings claw back the riches they've plundered for generations.

I'm always surprised when I see alt-right culture warriors arguing against renewables in favour of fossil fuels. They're just supporting the system that screws us all and enriches the oligarchs. Rather than viewing renewables solely as a climate issue - a true conservative looks at it as an economic issue with national security benefits. If we're struggling with the cost of power bills - cut the cord. If you don't like Middle Eastern countries - stop buying their products.

 

[LHV]

Why renewables are a win for conservatives

I'm conservative. Small government, personal responsibility, freedom and national security.

As many have pointed out - we're getting screwed on our power bills. The govt controls the supply network and is in bed with the power companies to fix prices in a way that profits big business and the govt. I fill my car and half the money goes to the govt in taxes and a good portion ends up in the Middle East where it's funding Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hezbollah etc.

As a conservative my dream scenario is independence. Solar panels on my house charging banks of batteries in my walls and roof - enough to run my household with some in reserve for cloudy days. My TV, dishwasher, kitchen, lights etc - all running off my own power supply. I love my V8 car but my petrol purchases fund things I do not support. An electric vehicle run off my own supply would mean I could stop emptying my wallet into the govt coffers every week.

I'd love to be able to disconnect the power line to my house and bid farewell to power bills forever. That's freedom.

I see a future where every house in my town does the same. Instead of ten local petrol stations - eight of them go out of business and we're left with just two boutique fuel stations where every few months I buy enough fuel to take my Harley out for a spin. I can source some locally produced natural gas to run my generator when needed in case my battery levels drop, but ideally I'll top my tank up every six months which keeps local producers in business while shutting out international predators.

As demand for petrol drops - the Middle Eastern economy collapses. I no longer see Saudi Princes and clowns like MBS flying on private jets with golden toilets. The Iranian religious regime is overthrown and is returned to it's pre-1980 society. Funding for Hezbollah and Hamas dries up and royal families across the region go into exile as popular uprisings claw back the riches they've plundered for generations.

I'm always surprised when I see alt-right culture warriors arguing against renewables in favour of fossil fuels. They're just supporting the system that screws us all and enriches the oligarchs. Rather than viewing renewables solely as a climate issue - a true conservative looks at it as an economic issue with national security benefits. If we're struggling with the cost of power bills - cut the cord. If you don't like Middle Eastern countries - stop buying their products.

Yeah, the world would be a better place if we’d never invented “climate change” and instead focussed on self-reliance, clean air, clean water, sustainability of resources, recycling, efficient public transport, availability of fresh food, encouraging walking and cycling, reducing exposure to hazardous chemicals etc. For example, I’ve got some mates, otherwise smart and commonsensical, who because of how climate controversy is caught up in the culture wars, have convinced themselves that burning coal is a good idea. In fact, they think we ought to burn more of it 🤦‍♂️ I mean FFS! How can the resource intensive nature of digging that horrible dirty shit out of the ground so it can be shipped all over the place to be incinerated and fill the air with noxious fumes be a good idea? Wouldn’t you want to stop that anyway? Even if no-one mentioned climate change ever

 

[Maverick]

A renewables only future isn’t cheap though. Unless you have energy independence like you said, solar panels powering your property and car (unlikely, it can only power a certain percentage), then the energy from renewables will come from expensive to maintain wind and solar farms and trust me we’ll be in the same position, Government and big business taking a massive cut, prices won’t be much cheaper for Australians certainly not in the near term where prices will continue to go up. The pitch will be “we’re saving the environment” but government and big business never lose out, they never ever create policy where they do!

The push for a renewables only future is coming from a Labor/Greens socialist coalition, and that means taxing the fuck out of everyone.

 

[SnowBogan]

A renewables only future isn’t cheap though. Unless you have energy independence like you said, solar panels powering your property and car (unlikely, it can only power a certain percentage), then the energy from renewables will come from expensive to maintain wind and solar farms and trust me we’ll be in the same position, Government and big business taking a massive cut, prices won’t be much cheaper for Australians certainly not in the near term where prices will continue to go up. The pitch will be “we’re saving the environment” but government and big business never lose out, they never ever create policy where they do!

The push for a renewables only future is coming from a Labor/Greens socialist coalition, and that means taxing the fuck out of everyone.

I agree with you.

Renewables only - is not currently viable. We need baseload power supplied by traditional sources.

Renewables only - owned by big business - will screw us the same as big oil.

Renewables only - needs to be in the hands of the individual which is currently unviable. But we’re getting closer.

Storage is getting better and cheaper. We can now carry around lithium battery packs the size of a book that hold more power than a traditional car battery that weighed more than a house brick.

Household drain is improving. My LED TV draws far less power than my old CRT or my first plasma. My household lighting draws far less than the old incandescent globes.

I have power bills from the late 90s and my daily usage is less now in 2024. No wonder the price of energy goes up. I’m using less and they have to get the money from somewhere. My fridge is more efficient, my TV, my lights, my washing machine. Heck even the V8 I drive is more efficient than my old 4 cylinder car from 1995.


Think about the battery life and weight of an iPad compared to the first laptops or even desktop computers. Laptops weighed a ton and were lucky to last an hour.

We’re not there yet but the day will come when we can cut off the energy companies. And that will mean freedom. Which they hate - so it’s in their best interest to ensure we stay addicted to their product.

This is why it frustrates me to see renewables become a left vs right culture war issue. Lefties want to fight climate change. Right wing wants freedom, independence, and small government.

Renewables can be a win for both sides. Makes you wonder who has an interest in driving division.

 

[Alian]

There are no solutions just trade-offs.

You want to be self reliant then Coal and nuclear is the answer because we have a ton of it.

Lithium batteries and solar panels are made using Rare Earth which comes from Rice Land, you are trading off the Saudi royal family for communist Rice Land.

You can't power industry, especially heavy industry with solar panels and wind power, you need reliable base load power. The massive problem with renewables is there is no way to determine the input, it's all up to mother nature. Dealing with the wide ranging fluctuations that renewables like solar and wind pose, you need to upgrade and engineer solutions which are costly and expensive, these costs get passed on to the consumer. It's like people saying they want free health care, it's not free, someone else is paying for it.

With Coal, nuclear, geothermal and hydroelectricity you can determine the input into the grid making the grid more stable.

You are right by saying this isn't a right vs left issue, but that's the way it has become, you may not think we are in a culture war but we are. Every western nation is being pushed into renewables which is great for the environment, I'm all for it, but in a Australia it is not beneficial from an economic point of view. We should be paying the prices that other energy rich countries that I mentioned above are paying.

If you're argument is that renewables are better for our carbon footprint then you are 100% correct.

I think we should go nuclear not for the cost but to get the knowledge and infrastructure to build a nuclear bomb or weapon if we ever go to war with Rice Land.

This is why the US don't want Iran to have a nuclear power plant. Their intelligence agencies know energy rich countries like Iran don't need nuclear power plants to provide energy.

 

[Superax]

Climate change is one of those concocted terms made up to control any given situation and force people into a particular course of action. Who on earth really has the ability to accurately measure something like that? Few have tried claiming milestones but there really is no proof…

 

[LHV]

Forget the simplistic sloganeering and propaganda (from all sides), humankind is considering a cascade of questions across which the scientific certainty reduces in probability:

1. does the climate change?
2. do human factors influence climate change?
3. is human influenced climate change a good or a bad thing?
4. is human influenced climate change such a bad thing that it justifies diverting trillions of dollars to possibly mitigate it?

Question 4 is the murkiest because that’s where climate science is exposed against realities of economics, engineering, politics and, to a certain degree, common-sense.

I choose to deal with the complexity, uncertainty and anxiety of climate change by emulating our world leaders who, with the exception of the UN Secretary General who regularly and publicly pisses his pants in terror, don’t appear to be losing any sleep at all at the prospect of an unliveable world consumed in fire. Nor do they appear to be in any great hurry to do much about it other than generate media releases and headlines. I mean these guys are presiding over a global system for emissions control that allows emissions to continue to rise. Surely they have access to the best science and understand the true danger? So if they’re unconvinced that the end of the world is nigh then so am I

 

[Superax]

Forget the simplistic sloganeering and propaganda (from all sides), humankind is considering a cascade of questions across which the scientific certainty reduces in probability:

1. does the climate change?
2. do human factors influence climate change?
3. is human influenced climate change a good or a bad thing?
4. is human influenced climate change such a bad thing that it justifies diverting trillions of dollars to possibly mitigate it?

Question 4 is the murkiest because that’s where climate science is exposed against realities of economics, engineering, politics and, to a certain degree, common-sense.

I choose to deal with the complexity, uncertainty and anxiety of climate change by emulating our world leaders who, with the exception of the UN Secretary General who regularly and publicly pisses his pants in terror, don’t appear to be losing any sleep at all at the prospect of an unliveable world consumed in fire. Nor do they appear to be in any great hurry to do much about it other than generate media releases and headlines. I mean these guys are presiding over a global system for emissions control that allows emissions to continue to rise. Surely they have access to the best science and understand the true danger? So if they’re unconvinced that the end of the world is nigh then so am I

Those are my questions precisely but you watch those whole thing being used to try and control people at some stage.

Even looking past all that and assuming climate change is real…exactly WTF are you going to do about it???

-Start murdering humans because there are too many breathing the air we compete for
-Stop people from beaux necessities such as driving cars, showing, using electricity

I always say to the climate change ferries, if you’re that concerned and you really don’t want to leave a carbon footprint just go and simply kill yourself…

 

[SnowBogan]

There are no solutions just trade-offs.

You want to be self reliant then Coal and nuclear is the answer because we have a ton of it.

Lithium batteries and solar panels are made using Rare Earth which comes from Rice Land, you are trading off the Saudi royal family for communist Rice Land.

You can't power industry, especially heavy industry with solar panels and wind power, you need reliable base load power. The massive problem with renewables is there is no way to determine the input, it's all up to mother nature. Dealing with the wide ranging fluctuations that renewables like solar and wind pose, you need to upgrade and engineer solutions which are costly and expensive, these costs get passed on to the consumer. It's like people saying they want free health care, it's not free, someone else is paying for it.

With Coal, nuclear, geothermal and hydroelectricity you can determine the input into the grid making the grid more stable.

You are right by saying this isn't a right vs left issue, but that's the way it has become, you may not think we are in a culture war but we are. Every western nation is being pushed into renewables which is great for the environment, I'm all for it, but in a Australia it is not beneficial from an economic point of view. We should be paying the prices that other energy rich countries that I mentioned above are paying.

If you're argument is that renewables are better for our carbon footprint then you are 100% correct.

I think we should go nuclear not for the cost but to get the knowledge and infrastructure to build a nuclear bomb or weapon if we ever go to war with Rice Land.

This is why the US don't want Iran to have a nuclear power plant. Their intelligence agencies know energy rich countries like Iran don't need nuclear power plants to provide energy.

I agree with much of what you say. Nuclear and geothermal are very reliable for baseload power.

My comments on independence don’t relate to us as a country - they refer to us as individuals. Being reliant on coal or nuclear makes us slaves to big corporations who control the prices as they see fit. A big part of the “cost of living” crisis is the cost of power. The individual has no hope of owning a nuclear or coal powered plant - but a renewables powered house is very realistic and would put thousands of dollars back into people’s pockets.

You mentioned heavy industry - also a valid point but another area where technology is catching up with demand. The Sydney desalination plant is heavy industry. Very energy intensive, yet it’s powered entirely by a wind farm south of Sydney with energy to spare.

The steelworks at Port Kembla are in the early stages of electrifying their operations. An off shore wind farm similar to those currently operating off the coast of England would provide sufficient energy for these demands. Off shore wind has proven much more reliable as those winds are stronger, more consistent, and don’t have noise or space issues that people currently complain about. Of note - the steelworks is looking at hydrogen as an alternative power source that can be stored. As you’d be aware - hydrogen can be generated at any time by using surplus power (see desal plant) to convert water to hydrogen.

Heavy industry sees a future with renewables. The capacity is very nearly upon us.

 

[Maverick]

Where do we see fuel prices going? I reckon down. Those with used pertol cars will have an advantage cost wise. Only thing that could stop it is government intervention and increased excise. Oil demand will lower which will lower price but oil supply will also lower, so it won’t be a terribly drastic price drop like we saw during Covid for example but a drop nonetheless?

 

[CCGrinder]

And then you have BS like this