Keith Pitt the lobby group for coal within government.

Remove this Banner Ad

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
This is such a terrible argument when we're not even exploring the how. All we hear are portents of doom from fossil fuel apologists if Australia goes 100% renewable based on little more than their fervent imagination whereas as we know with 100% certainty what will happen if we keep digging up fossil fuels like we are.
How do we move to that? And then, does it fix the problem at all?

If so, quantify exactly how much global benefit there will be to Australia being even negative 100% emissions.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
34,476
12,921
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
How do we move to that? And then, does it fix the problem at all?

If so, quantify exactly how much global benefit there will be to Australia being even negative 100% emissions.
We get the virtue signaller of the week award & can go to forums yelling 'look at me', 'no, no, not Austria.'
 

Power Raid

TheBrownDog
Oct 15, 2004
72,870
63,414
West Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No your throwing a random numbers at me that don't prove anything. You sound like a coal lobby spokesman.
It's a joke that you think we can just keep burning coal .
Maybe you could listen what the climate scientists say instead of the coal lobby. That's if you respect science and not BS.
Those numbers thrown at you are facts highlighting your statements were not correct

Further I note you don’t like responding to facts that don’t marry your own made up reality, other than a “look over here”
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Power Raid

TheBrownDog
Oct 15, 2004
72,870
63,414
West Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Wrong, Nuclear is way,way more expensive and you have spent plutonium hanging around for 100's of years.
The only people pushing for this uneconomic plan are those industry groups who can pivot from coal to nuclear to continue to make enormous profits.
I would have thought liberal voters respected the adverse affect this would have on the budget.
Please point to a jurisdiction on the planet with a renewables strategy that has low CO2, that doesn’t rely upon hydro or nuclear?

Otherwise your debate is limited to “I don’t like coal, renewables don’t work but I’m happy with a high CO2 outcome as a climate emergency is not a big enough issue to adopt proven, safe, clean, reliable low CO2 power generation”
 

Aristotle Pickett

Premium Platinum
Oct 19, 2020
5,430
10,127
AFL Club
Richmond
Show your working. I've already told you it will cost $750 billion to have a week of backup battery from renewables.

Even at $20 billion a nuclear power plant that's way ahead.
Come off it. No one is saying Nuclear is cheaper than renewables.Where do you get your ideas from?
Can you stop replying with questions and ask me to do research, that is the way of conspiracy theorists.
What about this quote from Malcom Turnball your former leader , " I think from a policy point of view, Barnaby is clearly determined to do everything he can to prevent Australia making a commitment to get to net zero emissions by 2050. There has never been, in my recollection, an issue of global importance on which Australia is so at odds with its closest friends and allies than this one. We are really, really out of step."
 

Aristotle Pickett

Premium Platinum
Oct 19, 2020
5,430
10,127
AFL Club
Richmond
Please point to a jurisdiction on the planet with a renewables strategy that has low CO2, that doesn’t rely upon hydro or nuclear?

Otherwise your debate is limited to “I don’t like coal, renewables don’t work but I’m happy with a high CO2 outcome as a climate emergency is not a big enough issue to adopt proven, safe, clean, reliable low CO2 power generation”
Let's stop now, you're clearly getting dodgy info from coal sources.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Come off it. No one is saying Nuclear is cheaper than renewables.Where do you get your ideas from?
Can you stop replying with questions and ask me to do research, that is the way of conspiracy theorists.
What about this quote from Malcom Turnball your former leader , " I think from a policy point of view, Barnaby is clearly determined to do everything he can to prevent Australia making a commitment to get to net zero emissions by 2050. There has never been, in my recollection, an issue of global importance on which Australia is so at odds with its closest friends and allies than this one. We are really, really out of step."
I'm not looking for a consensus of fools to validate actual numbers.

This is hard science fact for you. Based off the large scale battery bank installed in SA cost, up scaled to the size of power needed to ensure supply to just Victoria for a week of protection it costs $750,000,000,000.

I am potentially over estimating the cost of a nuclear power plant by 400% when I say we buy nearly 40 of them for that price.
 

Gough

Moderator
Sep 29, 2006
56,783
101,207
AFL Club
Hawthorn
How do we move to that? And then, does it fix the problem at all?

If so, quantify exactly how much global benefit there will be to Australia being even negative 100% emissions.
You seem to want detailed plans of how we move to 100% renewables, likewise I could ask you how we're to make this planet inhabitable when we see days like the one we've just had in BC every summer. Doing nothing, as Australia is at the moment is criminally negligent.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
34,476
12,921
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Come off it. No one is saying Nuclear is cheaper than renewables.Where do you get your ideas from?
Can you stop replying with questions and ask me to do research, that is the way of conspiracy theorists.
What about this quote from Malcom Turnball your former leader , " I think from a policy point of view, Barnaby is clearly determined to do everything he can to prevent Australia making a commitment to get to net zero emissions by 2050. There has never been, in my recollection, an issue of global importance on which Australia is so at odds with its closest friends and allies than this one. We are really, really out of step."
that is the way of conspiracy theorists ... you could pivot to Murdoch as an excuse for your ignorance.

Try this: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07...s-australian-economy-breathing-room/100256222
Current account surplus gives Australian economy breathing room, says Bank of America
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
You seem to want detailed plans of how we move to 100% renewables, likewise I could ask you how we're to make this planet inhabitable when we see days like the one we've just had in BC every summer. Doing nothing, as Australia is at the moment is criminally negligent.
I think if you're making big claims like "doing nothing as Australia is" and linking it to the events previously mentioned you should be able to show how doing something will fix that issue.

That's not too much to ask. Doing something, doing anything, could result in no benefit at all meanwhile causing significant harm.

And this is the great falling over of the climate catastrophe movement.

If you presented evidence that a particular CO2 concentration in the atmosphere would lead to specific climate and events in the positive then you'd be selling an easy win - but the models aren't working, the predictions aren't panning out.

If you were able to say that the whole world dropping emissions or even total atmospheric CO2 down to a certain percentage would lower extreme weather or climate events with even a reasonable degree of confidence then it would be done.

Instead we have a circumstance now where extreme weather is touted, only when it suits. For example, is it inconvenient that cyclones are trending downwards in both severity and number, based off the BOMs own website, over the last few decades?

I give you the benefit of assuming you're arguing from a place of good intentions, but eventually we are going to have to treat nuclear power like it's 60 years older than the examples we are using - just like we do with modern car safety.

It's green, it's cheap, it's reliable and for consistent reliable power it's far cheaper than renewables.
 

Gough

Moderator
Sep 29, 2006
56,783
101,207
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I think if you're making big claims like "doing nothing as Australia is" and linking it to the events previously mentioned you should be able to show how doing something will fix that issue.

That's not too much to ask. Doing something, doing anything, could result in no benefit at all meanwhile causing significant harm.

And this is the great falling over of the climate catastrophe movement.

If you presented evidence that a particular CO2 concentration in the atmosphere would lead to specific climate and events in the positive then you'd be selling an easy win - but the models aren't working, the predictions aren't panning out.

If you were able to say that the whole world dropping emissions or even total atmospheric CO2 down to a certain percentage would lower extreme weather or climate events with even a reasonable degree of confidence then it would be done.

Instead we have a circumstance now where extreme weather is touted, only when it suits. For example, is it inconvenient that cyclones are trending downwards in both severity and number, based off the BOMs own website, over the last few decades?

I give you the benefit of assuming you're arguing from a place of good intentions, but eventually we are going to have to treat nuclear power like it's 60 years older than the examples we are using - just like we do with modern car safety.

It's green, it's cheap, it's reliable and for consistent reliable power it's far cheaper than renewables.
We're doing nothing.
In Hockey lingo we're a bunch of leaners.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
We're doing nothing.
In Hockey lingo we're a bunch of leaners.
I'm suggesting that if you're requiring a change and saying that without the change there will be further climate disasters then the onus is on you to demonstrate what action will fix that.

Because doing something "doing anything more than nothing" can cause harm for no gain at all.

I'm very much on board with fixing a problem, but you need to demonstrate;
1 - What the required level of CO2 is
2 - That it will resolve the issue
 

Gough

Moderator
Sep 29, 2006
56,783
101,207
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I'm suggesting that if you're requiring a change and saying that without the change there will be further climate disasters then the onus is on you to demonstrate what action will fix that.

Because doing something "doing anything more than nothing" can cause harm for no gain at all.

I'm very much on board with fixing a problem, but you need to demonstrate;
1 - What the required level of CO2 is
2 - That it will resolve the issue
You're not on board though and you're fooling nobody by saying that you are. Every single measure that we might use to reduce our carbon footprint beyond "going nuclear" you reject. That's not an answer, that's just being a mining industry shill because pretty much nobody outside of that support your idea.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
You're not on board though and you're fooling nobody by saying that you are. Every single measure that we might use to reduce our carbon footprint beyond "going nuclear" you reject. That's not an answer, that's just being a mining industry shill because pretty much nobody outside of that support your idea.
What benefit do we get from reducing our carbon footprint?

I remember during the fires a couple of years back you were laying the blame for the fires at the feet of the government for not taking action on climate change.

Well I challenge you to show how even a -100% emissions from Australia would have impacted the global situation enough to have prevented the fires.

Your position is assigning all responsibility to the non action and unable to show the results of action.

You are the one literally selling a dream.

It's so simple though. If you want zero emissions, it's going to cost a lot of money or we are going nuclear and it will still cost money but not as much.

What happens when we are there and we still have climate change? Do we go to war over it? Do we build a bubble over Australia?

Show the expected returns for the money spent.

Or do we admit that it's never been the goal. It's just the next convenient political tool?
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
34,476
12,921
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
You seem to want detailed plans of how we move to 100% renewables, likewise I could ask you how we're to make this planet inhabitable when we see days like the one we've just had in BC every summer. Doing nothing, as Australia is at the moment is criminally negligent.
It would be criminally negligent to destroy our economy/jobs for little to no change worldwide. IT would make zip difference to our climate.
Despite China no longer buying our coal, its made no difference in 'saving the world'.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
34,476
12,921
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
This is just denialism put in a wordy way. You're a completely unfit mother I'm afraid whose child should be removed for their own good and given to someone who wants to give them a future and a world worth living in.
Let's ignore your blatant personal attack here and go back to how I said these discussions go, because you've played your part in it perfectly.

Offered absolutely no solutions except dreams of zero emissions and less to no climate disasters in Australia regardless of what happens elsewhere.

You can't even tell me what impact Australia being zero emissions will achieve. How do you intend to sell it other than "those who disagree are bad people"?

And I'd prefer my children didn't have to try and financially recover from hippies with more dreams than facts in their heads spending fortunes that achieve exactly NONE of their intended goals but still cost all that money and all that hardship in the meantime.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Australia received the lowest score awarded, just 10 out of 100, for the ‘climate action’ goal,

A goal for virtue seekers.
We should commit to negative 1000% emissions by 2080.

It would be the most far reaching commitment of any nation on the planet. It will achieve nothing. It will achieve nothing if we achieve the target too.
 

Aristotle Pickett

Premium Platinum
Oct 19, 2020
5,430
10,127
AFL Club
Richmond
that is the way of conspiracy theorists ... you could pivot to Murdoch as an excuse for your ignorance.

Try this: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07...s-australian-economy-breathing-room/100256222
Current account surplus gives Australian economy breathing room, says Bank of America
?? We're talking about the cost of starting nuclear energy from scratch, which is plainly economically unviable without massive government handouts.
Are you mad? The only people pushing for it are the right wing nuts with half their arm up Gina Rinehart's arse, like Angus Fraser and Barnaby Joyce.
Have you ever wondered why these front bench donkeys never support renewables?
Because it's not what their lobby groups want. They are puppets for the fossil fuel industry do you realise that?
When did you start to believe in climate change btw? This year?
 

Theseventhhamster

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 20, 2005
13,930
10,587
Hell
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Milwaukee Bucks
SA battery is not for storage, it's not and has never been anyone's plan to use anywhere near that scale of batteries, Taylor is as usual posting disinformation.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
56,037
64,494
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
SA battery is not for storage, it's not and has never been anyone's plan to use anywhere near that scale of batteries, Taylor is as usual posting disinformation.
You're misrepresentation of my facts to avoid discussing the issue is telling.

The storage needs to cover a week of no generation to make it comparable to the reliability of fossil fuels.

Suggest a better, cheaper, alternative than batteries to allow the solar and wind to power all our needs that will allow on demand power in any sustained conditions.

You had that chance and you chose to avoid discussing it at all to attempt to make what I said invalid in the conversation because it is the HUGE inconvenience and the entire hurdle.

Find a bigger battery and I'll run the numbers again.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
34,476
12,921
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
?? We're talking about the cost of starting nuclear energy from scratch, which is plainly economically unviable without massive government handouts.
Are you mad? The only people pushing for it are the right wing nuts with half their arm up Gina Rinehart's arse, like Angus Fraser and Barnaby Joyce.
Have you ever wondered why these front bench donkeys never support renewables?
Because it's not what their lobby groups want. They are puppets for the fossil fuel industry do you realise that?
When did you start to believe in climate change btw? This year?
I get that you think lobby groups run the political conversation - they dont elect Governments.

As for climate change I made a living reducing carbon footprints in the 90s.
 

STFUJEFF

All Australian
Sep 17, 2008
872
433
Jeffs Shed
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Nothing
You're misrepresentation of my facts to avoid discussing the issue is telling.

The storage needs to cover a week of no generation to make it comparable to the reliability of fossil fuels.

Suggest a better, cheaper, alternative than batteries to allow the solar and wind to power all our needs that will allow on demand power in any sustained conditions.

You had that chance and you chose to avoid discussing it at all to attempt to make what I said invalid in the conversation because it is the HUGE inconvenience and the entire hurdle.

Find a bigger battery and I'll run the numbers again.
Whats a battery ?
A dams a battery,hydrogen is a battery, molten salt is a battery.
Building turbines in permanently windy locations and varied locations interconnected need fewer storage solutions(batteries).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad