The war against renewable energy

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Interesting discussion by a few in the Greens to push for 75% reduction in emissions by 2030

Watch the RWNJ go ape shiit when that gets out

Well, that would be more in line with what the latest IPCC science suggests (zero by 2035). The trouble with the 2050 target is that it's already out of date if you want to stay below 1.5. It was based on science done a few years before Paris; that's been updated.
 
The $millions being spent on renewables chalked up something to be proud of:

When it is reflected in our power bills I'll be happy. I'm yet to be convinced we are getting bang for our buck but that is a different issue to the climate change aspects of our move to renewables, the reduced emissions.
 
The $millions being spent on renewables chalked up something to be proud of:

When it reflected in our power bills I'll be happy. I'm yet to be convinced we are getting bang for our buck but that is a different issue to the climate change aspects of our move to renewables, the reduced emissions.
Its reflected in my bill and Im happy

I had a dead inverter changed and saw my bill double then halve
 
The $millions being spent on renewables chalked up something to be proud of:

When it reflected in our power bills I'll be happy. I'm yet to be convinced we are getting bang for our buck but that is a different issue to the climate change aspects of our move to renewables, the reduced emissions.
Imagine what we could have done if the government didn't spend the last eight years actively trying to prevent investment in renewables?
 
Imagine what we could have done if the government didn't spend the last eight years actively trying to prevent investment in renewables?

Need a list of the projects that were funded in part by the taxpayer*?

What a genuinely ignorant remark by one of the yes/no merchants that are not interested in the issues beyond a shallow political understanding.
We saw the investors cashing in the subsidy, aka monetising the value in a way that will increase prices.

*https://www.cefc.com.au/where-we-invest/
 
Need a list of the projects that were funded in part by the taxpayer*?

What a genuinely ignorant remark by one of the yes/no merchants that are not interested in the issues beyond a shallow political understanding.
We saw the investors cashing in the subsidy, aka monetising the value in a way that will increase prices.

*https://www.cefc.com.au/where-we-invest/
These have happened despite the Feds, not as they're trying to convince you now because of them.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

These have happened despite the Feds, not as they're trying to convince you now because of them.

Yeh, the CEFC get fed direct from the Treasury .... but lets not ruin the politics. This is the Feds stumping up investment in renewables, its on going, but the politics, as well you know but do not want to acknowledge.
You are every bit as ridiculous as those who represent climate change as with or against coal.

So I will attempt to help your very closed mind, courtesy of Google & Wikipedia:
 
By the end of the decade, the contribution of the United States’ plastics industry to climate change will exceed that of coal-fired power, says a study.

A report from Bennington College’s Beyond Plastics think tank says that the US plastics industry is currently responsible for at least 232 million tons of CO2e gas emissions per year – the equivalent to those of 116 average-sized coal-fired power plants.


The Huffington Post reports that while roughly 65% of the country’s coal-fired plants closed over the past decade, the US plastics industry has grown at such a rate, it threatens to offset any benefits that might have resulted.


Plastics already produce 3.8% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions throughout their lifecycle, and while the industry often touts plastic’s recyclability, Beyond Plastics’ report says: “In truth, less than 9% of plastics are recycled, and new proposals for “chemical recycling” or “advanced recycling” actually have more in common with incineration—a major source of both climate emissions and harmful air pollutants.”

 
incineration—a major source of both climate emissions and harmful air pollutants.”

Is that statement correct, or is it a motherhood catch all that is used to promote landfill ?

Despite many claims made around plastic recycling, I am dubious of how much of the recycled material does not end up in landfills.
 
A car that can power your home – and cut your electricity bills – is edging closer to reality.


Early next year, energy provider AGL and carmaker Nissan will begin a trial of vehicle-to-grid technology.

As part of the trial, 50 EV owners will install a wall charger in their home that will allow them to feed electricity into their car’s battery during the day and then use it to power their house at night, when electricity is at its most expensive.

The tech will make it possible for EV owners to reduce their power bills and even sell excess electricity back to the grid at times.

Similar trials have been running in Japan since 2015 and more than 7000 customers have participated.

The technology has wider applications as well.


Unlike coal or nuclear-powered stations, which send power one way from the grid to the final user, wind and solar allow individuals to create their own power and potentially feed that back into the grid.

“People are buying and selling power from their own house.”




The peak period for electricity usage is from 5pm to 9pm.

“We’re going to need more batteries in the system and electric vehicles have very big ones,” he said.


With the money that would be wasted on a nuclear plant and the associated storage problems in the future surely makes more sense to spend part of that subsidising duel purpose storage/transport solutions.
 
A car that can power your home – and cut your electricity bills – is edging closer to reality.


Early next year, energy provider AGL and carmaker Nissan will begin a trial of vehicle-to-grid technology.

As part of the trial, 50 EV owners will install a wall charger in their home that will allow them to feed electricity into their car’s battery during the day and then use it to power their house at night, when electricity is at its most expensive.

The tech will make it possible for EV owners to reduce their power bills and even sell excess electricity back to the grid at times.

Similar trials have been running in Japan since 2015 and more than 7000 customers have participated.

The technology has wider applications as well.


Unlike coal or nuclear-powered stations, which send power one way from the grid to the final user, wind and solar allow individuals to create their own power and potentially feed that back into the grid.

“People are buying and selling power from their own house.”




The peak period for electricity usage is from 5pm to 9pm.

“We’re going to need more batteries in the system and electric vehicles have very big ones,” he said.


With the money that would be wasted on a nuclear plant and the associated storage problems in the future surely makes more sense to spend part of that subsidising duel purpose storage/transport solutions.

The problem is storing energy from renewables, not generating power.

'There has been a seismic shift in Australia's electricity network as a glut of solar energy turns the spotlight on an overwhelmed national power grid.'

I dont disagree with the potential of electric vehicles & their role in both storage & use. Nuclear energy use is demonstrable, the storage problem that dogs renewables is as old as renewables & thats as old as my folks solar powered hot water system in the 70s, & cold showers after footy training. My current solar
is backed by electricity.
 
The problem is storing energy from renewables, not generating power.


'There has been a seismic shift in Australia's electricity network as a glut of solar energy turns the spotlight on an overwhelmed national power grid.'
This is both it has storage and reduces the need to transport the solar over the overwhelmed grid ....and its a car that people consider essential so its not like your just buying an expensive battery for 1 purpose.
 
This is both it has storage and reduces the need to transport the solar over the overwhelmed grid ....and its a car that people consider essential so its not like your just buying an expensive battery for 1 purpose.

It doesnt really do much in storage terms,though every bit helps.
 
With the money the coalition have spend subsidising fossil fuels we could have a battery in every home in australia in 5 years.

The blindness involved with electricity generation is principally the problems at State level, starting with privatisation, e.g Victoria taking the money & absolving itself of responsibility for the grid.
Be happy for you to put some dollars on the issue, I'd need to research them.
 
Imagine what we could have done if the government didn't spend the last eight years actively trying to prevent investment in renewables?

The last 8 years eh, fair dinkum unbelievable, not that it woupld influence the true belevers, as long as they dont see the light:


There has been a seismic shift in Australia's electricity network as a glut of solar energy turns the spotlight on an overwhelmed national power grid.

Key points:
  • Solar power capacity in the National Electricity Market has tripled in the last four years
  • Queensland is constructing solar and wind farms at speed as it marches towards a 2030 renewables target
  • Experts say investment will be hampered until the oversupply problems can be solved
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top