The war against renewable energy

Remove this Banner Ad

Take WA as an example, the WA Govt gas initiative reserves for local consumption
versus
what the other State Govts did that they now need the Feds to pull them out of because of their own behaviour.

Elroo its more than 10 years since WA reserved gas from the NW Shelf - the failure of other State Govts is there for even you to see - tough for the welded on political class to cop because their mob have stuffed it, so it needs to be someone elses' problem, in your case blaming the private sector, get real man, it a clusterf ...ailure !!

Every gas development since 2006 involved State Govts rejecting or ignoring reserving gas for local consumption as in WA.

what the other State Govts did that they now need the Feds to pull them out of because of their own behaviour.

They what now?? o_O

Elroo its more than 10 years since WA reserved gas from the NW Shelf

Ive been in the idustry for almost 30-years, so yeh I have a fair idea of what the industry is like!

so it needs to be someone elses' problem, in your case blaming the private sector,

Yeh thanks for that, maybe you need to look up the gold plating of the distribution network and the dodgy, almost corrupt dealings of the private sector! :rolleyes:
 
They what now?? o_O



Ive been in the idustry for almost 30-years, so yeh I have a fair idea of what the industry is like!



Yeh thanks for that, maybe you need to look up the gold plating of the distribution network and the dodgy, almost corrupt dealings of the private sector! :rolleyes:

My point Elroo is that its not just simply blaming one party or another as you did blaming the private sector - the problems in eastern Aus with gas supply would not exist if State Govts accepted their responsibility, reserving gas for local consumption - yes/no?
The stuff ups are not restricted to just State Govts that is for sure, and the distribution networks are just another example of a failed privatisation for short term gain.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They what now?? o_O



Ive been in the idustry for almost 30-years, so yeh I have a fair idea of what the industry is like!



Yeh thanks for that, maybe you need to look up the gold plating of the distribution network and the dodgy, almost corrupt dealings of the private sector! :rolleyes:

Perhaps we do need a JOGMEC, KORES or Denham with the underlying govt directive.

India' model is a little less transparent but 90% of the transaction including Adani are actually government steered or directives.

It begs the question why we aren't strategic or long term in our thinking as s nation.
 
My point Elroo is that its not just simply blaming one party or another as you did blaming the private sector - the problems in eastern Aus with gas supply would not exist if State Govts accepted their responsibility, reserving gas for local consumption - yes/no?
The stuff ups are not restricted to just State Govts that is for sure, and the distribution networks are just another example of a failed privatisation for short term gain.

Where else does Victorian gas go, except to local consumption? o_O
 
Perhaps we do need a JOGMEC, KORES or Denham with the underlying govt directive.

India' model is a little less transparent but 90% of the transaction including Adani are actually government steered or directives.

It begs the question why we aren't strategic or long term in our thinking as s nation.
That sounds like good damn government interference in the free market! :eek:
 
Nuclear and Hydro - personally I can't see better renewable sources (for all practical purposes) than hydro and nuclear. Clean, reliable, safe and cheap.
Uranium no, thorium yes. We have an opportunity to be world leaders in thorium reactors (and it's more abundant than uranium, and leaves less waste) but governments seem to consider any spending industry support (apart from coal) as an 'expense' not an investment.
 
Uranium no, thorium yes. We have an opportunity to be world leaders in thorium reactors (and it's more abundant than uranium, and leaves less waste) but governments seem to consider any spending industry support (apart from coal) as an 'expense' not an investment.

Uranium in gen 4 is the same as thorium in the sense they are both breeders. The difference is uranium is more effective and cleaner than thorium.

But yes thorium has some properties that are better than gen 3 uranium.
 
That sounds like good damn government interference in the free market! :eek:

Governments should interfere. There job is strategy, management and policy.

What the should try and avoid is delivering the corporate state by getting involved with operations.
 
LjumLZr.jpg
 
WA subsidies their government owned generators to the tune of approximately $500 million per year, thankfully this is being reduced;

https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov....ernment-energised-for-electricity-reform.aspx



Queensland subsidies their power generation by similar amounts as WA;

https://www.wattelectricalnews.com/NEWS/The-huge-energy-cross-subsidy-Queensland-consumers-don’t-see/32482



Thats before we even get onto projects like the Adani mines!

Is it unreasonable to expect the value of the subsidies to be shown on the bill?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

‘It’s an A-Z of all the global warming claims’: Climate Depot’s Marc Morano says ‘The Climate Hustle’ is an answer to Al Gore’s films.

 
At least that fossil fuel whore is getting paid to spread bull s**t. You guys doing it for free are just bellends.

you're position would carry weight if what you support was capable of displacing coal

given it can't and won't, why do you support it over options that can? to me, it suggests you don't believe in global warming as much as you claim
 
you're position would carry weight if what you support was capable of displacing coal

given it can't and won't, why do you support it over options that can? to me, it suggests you don't believe in global warming as much as you claim
6 fails in one sentence. Your best effort in the thread so far. :thumbsu:
 
you're position would carry weight if what you support was capable of displacing coal

given it can't and won't, why do you support it over options that can? to me, it suggests you don't believe in global warming as much as you claim

They can and they will.

Why do you insist of pushing failed expense tech that will never be cost effective?
 
They can and they will.

Why do you insist of pushing failed expense tech that will never be cost effective?

That's strange because the economic facts and the technical facts are clear based on live links
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top