Australian Politics Forum

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #660 - Feb 24^th, 2025 at 3:54pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 24^th, 2025 at 3:46pm:

because delusions are not amenable to evidence such as record rains and flooding on the East coast leading to inability to insure houses, and market failure caused by insisting that private companies must be 'cost effective' without government subsidies, while preventing nationalization of essential industry - which is taboo in the delusional religion of free markets.

So which "record rainfalls" and "record flooding" be specific? Where is this "inability to insure houses"? Do you mean houses built on flood plains?

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59447
Here
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #661 - Feb 24^th, 2025 at 3:58pm

freediver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2025 at 4:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2025 at 1:59pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2025 at 1:25pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2025 at 1:03pm:

lee wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2025 at 2:45pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 21^st, 2025 at 9:25pm:

It may apply to wind farms in the centre of Australia. If there are any.

That research by the Snowy2 Commission said that SA already had periods of solar and wind drought.

"An example of when high amounts of storage would be needed include when there are wind or solar ‘droughts’. In South Australia across the financial years of 2015 and 2016, there was a deficit between average wind production and minimum wind production over a two-week period of 60GWh."

https://www.snowyhydro.com.au/snowy-20/faqs/

So why does Australia suffer wind and solar droughts?

"We therefore systematically analyse the relationship between compound solar radiation and wind speed droughts with weather systems and climate modes of variability over multiple time scales. We find that compound solar and wind droughts occur most frequently in winter, affecting at least five significant energy-producing regions simultaneously on 10% of days. The associated weather systems vary by season and by drought type, although widespread cloud cover and anticyclonic circulation patterns are common features.

...

Exploiting these spatial differences could minimise the variability of electricity generation across the grid by offsetting areas of low production with areas of higher production20,21,22,23,24,25. However, the possibility of weather-related grid-wide impacts cannot be ruled out. A combination of weather systems could align to concurrently reduce wind and solar energy potential over a large area. For example, there is a dynamical link between blocking highs that bring calm conditions over southeast Australia and cloudiness associated with tropical cyclones in Australia’s north26. Specific to renewable energy, a weather system featuring high pressure near Australia’s southwest has been related to low grid-wide supply, although not every occurrence of this weather pattern yields substantial reductions23."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-023-00507-y

Yet we had these droughts without any customer impact because the effects were mitigated, the Snowy 2 scheme alleviates the issue for the next 100 years. So what are you jabbering about ? There is no problem here.

SA can provide cheap wind and solar energy when available and they have backup power supply guaranteed for 100 Years covering when they cannot.

Quack quack - pumped hydro is not cheap power.

It is when it is needed under 2% of the time.

You can use it as often as you want. I doubt there is any Australian pumped hydro scheme that is running less than 2% of the time. All you need is roughly a factor of 2 wholesale price difference at predictable times during each day and it will get used every day. You would expect to get that just from demand fluctuations.

SA is connected to the Snowy Hydro system via the network Use it as an overflow, It is there when they need it. The hydro scheme produces all the time mainly supplying NSW, Vic and ACT + SA when required. The snowy 2 scheme started in 2018 and is 60% complete on schedule. It is expecting to find similar ground condition and be complete on schedule. The scheme is expected to be delivering power in 2027 and fully operational in 2028.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #662 - Feb 24^th, 2025 at 4:17pm

Dnarever wrote on Feb 24^th, 2025 at 3:58pm:

The snowy 2 scheme started in 2018 and is 60% complete on schedule.

"The controversial 2GW project has suffered huge delays and a series of cost blowouts since its inception, when it was projected to cost about $2 billion and be up and running well ahead of the state’s planned coal plant retirements, on this side of 2025.

But Snowy 2.0’s completion date was earlier this year pushed out – again – to as late as December 2029, due to what Snowy Hydro’s then new CEO Dennis Barnes described as a combination of delays across five major work fronts."

https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-biggest-engineering-debacle-snowy-2-0-cos...

Sometimes prognostications can bite you on the arse. Roll Eyes

And that's apart from its $2 billion explosion to $12 billion.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59447
Here
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #663 - Feb 24^th, 2025 at 8:07pm

lee wrote on Feb 24^th, 2025 at 4:17pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 24^th, 2025 at 3:58pm:

The snowy 2 scheme started in 2018 and is 60% complete on schedule.

"The controversial 2GW project has suffered huge delays and a series of cost blowouts since its inception, when it was projected to cost about $2 billion and be up and running well ahead of the state’s planned coal plant retirements, on this side of 2025.

But Snowy 2.0’s completion date was earlier this year pushed out – again – to as late as December 2029, due to what Snowy Hydro’s then new CEO Dennis Barnes described as a combination of delays across five major work fronts."

https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-biggest-engineering-debacle-snowy-2-0-cos...

Sometimes prognostications can bite you on the arse. Roll Eyes

And that's apart from its $2 billion explosion to $12 billion.

Yes it appears there have been problems. There was with the original scheme also. Hope its back on track as it does look like a valuable project.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59447 Here Gender:	Re: privatisation Reply #664 - Feb 24^th, 2025 at 8:09pm Is there a connection between the last 5 pages and Privatisation? Still nobody is aware of a single successful privatisation in Australia. The people are ripped off every time.
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 13328
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #665 - Feb 26^th, 2025 at 11:58am

Dnarever wrote on Feb 24^th, 2025 at 8:09pm:

Is there a connection between the last 5 pages and Privatisation?

I began "the last 5 pages", by noting that free market/ privatization freaks are objecting to the Oz government's take-over/support for an essential steel industry, including green steel at Whyalla, which a crooked/incompetent private sector operator (namely GFG) has bungled in the face of global tariffs and global over-production in the "free market" (complicated by lower prices from producers advantaged by 'economies of scale').

lee of course is a delusional AGW-CO2 climate denier, so he's negating the prospects of a green steel industry at Whyalla - or anywhere else.

Quote:

Still nobody is aware of a single successful privatisation in Australia. The people are ripped off every time.

Correct.

But the '("invisible hand") free market knows best' mythology dies hard....a bit like the (historical) 'Christ is God' Christian myth and other religious beliefs, die hard.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 26^th, 2025 at 12:06pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #666 - Feb 26^th, 2025 at 1:13pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 11:58am:

lee of course is a delusional AGW-CO2 climate denier, so he's negating the prospects of a green steel industry at Whyalla - or anywhere else.

Poor petal. So infused with your China philosophy that all you spread is lies.

1. Nowhere have I denied AGE- CO2 climate, whatever that is, you haven't defined it anywhere. With references. Wink

2. You don't appear to have heard that the South Australian Government has pulled out of the "Hydrogen Green Steel" fiasco, as have many proponents, because the number do not stack up, besides you need carbon to make steel, else it is merely iron, like the way the transfers are fitted to your tee shirt. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 13328
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #667 - Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm

lee wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 1:13pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 11:58am:

lee of course is a delusional AGW-CO2 climate denier, so he's negating the prospects of a green steel industry at Whyalla - or anywhere else.

Poor petal. So infused with your China philosophy that all you spread is lies.

1. Nowhere have I denied AGE- CO2 climate, whatever that is, you haven't defined it anywhere. With references. Wink

The delusional denier of the reality of AGW-CO2 induced climate change needs a definition...go figure....

Quote:

2. You don't appear to have heard that the South Australian Government has pulled out of the "Hydrogen Green Steel" fiasco, as have many proponents, because the number do not stack up, besides you need carbon to make steel, else it is merely iron, like the way the transfers are fitted to your tee shirt. Wink

Green steel is a vital part of the transition to a green economy. Did you miss the link to associated green hydrogen/ammonia technologies?

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #668 - Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:42pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

The delusional denier of the reality of AGW-CO2 induced climate change needs a definition...go figure....

So you can't define it. Well done. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

Green steel is a vital part of the transition to a green economy.

That's presupposing that there NEEDS to be a transition. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

Did you miss the link to associated green hydrogen/ammonia technologies?

Did you miss where the production of hydrogen is too expensive and firms are not progressing with it? Or do you anticipate "hydrogen/ammonia technologies" without the hydrogen? Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 13328
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #669 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am

lee wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:42pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

The delusional denier of the reality of AGW-CO2 induced climate change needs a definition...go figure....

So you can't define it. Well done. Grin

Er - AGW-CO2 means climate change caused by burning fossil fuels resulting in increasing CO2 levels (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

Poor crippled-brain lee --it's sad to see.

Quote:

Green steel is presupposing that there NEEDS to be a transition. Wink

Indeed - and everyone apart from climate deniers (defined above for the slow learners) agrees on that need.

Quote:

Did you miss where the production of hydrogen is too expensive and firms are not progressing with it? Or do you anticipate "hydrogen/ammonia technologies" without the hydrogen? Roll Eyes

The various technologies are progressing well, but the 'scaling up' processes , along with the rollout of PVs and wind turbines, are being hindered by free market principles on behalf of profit maximization.

Today we learn BP is abandonding its green transition plans, because shareholders are demanding the higher returns from fossil exploitation, compared with renewable energy.

Deplorable, just shows there's no place for private sector greed in a global climate emergency.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #670 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 12:16pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

Er - AGW-CO2 means climate change caused by burning fossil fuels resulting in increasing CO2 levels (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

Ok so that means water vapour as the major greenhouse gas, and something a recent paper Ma et al, showed is not causing increased evaporation, rather wind stilling is the culprit. Wind stilling? The things that stop wind turbines from turning.

Now what PROOF do you have of CO2 increasing temperatures. Data?

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

Indeed - and everyone apart from climate deniers (defined above for the slow learners) agrees on that need.

And yet you haven't shown it to be econically feasible, no one has and that explains why so many projects have come to an abrupt halt. Green dreams are not proof of anything.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

The various technologies are progressing well, but the 'scaling up' processes , along with the rollout of PVs and wind turbines, are being hindered by free market principles on behalf of profit maximization.

Rubbish. Or of course you can link to a recent paper saying that? You know facts not your convenient fictions. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

Today we learn BP is abandonding its green transition plans, because shareholders are demanding the higher returns from fossil exploitation, compared with renewable energy.

Yes they were going broke, only 2.3% annual profit and would have gotten smaller had they disinvested in fossil fuels. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

Deplorable, just shows there's no place for private sector greed in a global climate emergency.

And another one. Where exactly is this climate emergency? Guterres - boiling oceans? Grin

BTW - you didn't get back to us about record rains or floods, although records are made to be broken. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30165
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #671 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 12:52pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

lee wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:42pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

The delusional denier of the reality of AGW-CO2 induced climate change needs a definition...go figure....

So you can't define it. Well done. Grin

Er - AGW-CO2 means climate change caused by burning fossil fuels resulting in increasing CO2 levels (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

Poor crippled-brain lee --it's sad to see.

Quote:

Green steel is presupposing that there NEEDS to be a transition. Wink

Indeed - and everyone apart from climate deniers (defined above for the slow learners) agrees on that need.

Quote:

Did you miss where the production of hydrogen is too expensive and firms are not progressing with it? Or do you anticipate "hydrogen/ammonia technologies" without the hydrogen? Roll Eyes

The various technologies are progressing well, but the 'scaling up' processes , along with the rollout of PVs and wind turbines, are being hindered by free market principles on behalf of profit maximization.

Today we learn BP is abandonding its green transition plans, because shareholders are demanding the higher returns from fossil exploitation, compared with renewable energy.

Deplorable, just shows there's no place for private sector greed in a global climate emergency.

Again you dodged answering the poser that how do you have green steel with ammonia and hydrogen techniques/methods without hydrogen?????? Grin

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 13328
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #672 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:09pm

lee wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 12:16pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

Er - AGW-CO2 means climate change caused by burning fossil fuels resulting in increasing CO2 levels (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

Ok so that means water vapour as the major greenhouse gas,

Crippled brain lee strike again: no, it means CO2 and methane associated with the fossil industry are also major greenhouse gases.

Quote:

Now what PROOF do you have of CO2 increasing temperatures. Data?

See the IPCC consensus.

Quote:

And yet you haven't shown it to be econically feasible, no one has and that explains why so many projects have come to an abrupt halt. Green dreams are not proof of anything.

Indeed private sector greed is now hindering the transition, but if the climate keeps becoming more intolerable for humans as forecast by climate scientists, even you will be forced to shed your free market delusions.

Quote:

Rubbish. Or of course you can link to a recent paper saying that? You know facts not your convenient fictions. Wink

Already did supply a link re steel/green ammonia. But google is on the case:

Yes, green steel is possible, but it's expensive to produce at scale and may not be commercially viable until the 2030s.

Note: But it WILL be...

How is green steel made?
Hydrogen: Hydrogen can replace coke in the steelmaking process to extract oxygen from iron ore. Hydrogen can be made from water and renewable electricity through electrolysis.
Ammonia: Ammonia can replace coal as a reducing agent in the steelmaking process.

Challenges

Cost: Green steel is more expensive to produce than traditional steel.
Infrastructure: Significant infrastructure investments are required to scale up green steel production.
....

ie, back to cost - and the greed of private sector players.

That's why govenments should manage the transition, not the greedy private sector .....and governments can issue their own money, rather than depending on "taxpayer money" - do try to keep up; the issue then is "opportunity costs" for nations, not a charge/cost for individual taxpayers.

Quote:

Where exactly is this climate emergency? Guterres - boiling oceans? Grin

Yes.

Quote:

BTW - you didn't get back to us about record rains or floods, although records are made to be broken. Wink

Indeed, and they ARE being broken , that's why the insurance industry is asking for government support - do try to keep up.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 13328
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #673 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:12pm

Gnads wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 12:52pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 11:39am:

lee wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:42pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 26^th, 2025 at 6:19pm:

The delusional denier of the reality of AGW-CO2 induced climate change needs a definition...go figure....

So you can't define it. Well done. Grin

Er - AGW-CO2 means climate change caused by burning fossil fuels resulting in increasing CO2 levels (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

Poor crippled-brain lee --it's sad to see.

Quote:

Green steel is presupposing that there NEEDS to be a transition. Wink

Indeed - and everyone apart from climate deniers (defined above for the slow learners) agrees on that need.

Quote:

Did you miss where the production of hydrogen is too expensive and firms are not progressing with it? Or do you anticipate "hydrogen/ammonia technologies" without the hydrogen? Roll Eyes

The various technologies are progressing well, but the 'scaling up' processes , along with the rollout of PVs and wind turbines, are being hindered by free market principles on behalf of profit maximization.

Today we learn BP is abandonding its green transition plans, because shareholders are demanding the higher returns from fossil exploitation, compared with renewable energy.

Deplorable, just shows there's no place for private sector greed in a global climate emergency.

Again you dodged answering the poser that how do you have green steel with ammonia and hydrogen techniques/methods without hydrogen?????? Grin

See my last post (#672); and learn how to use google, so you can do your own research instead of asking me.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18101
Gender: male

Re: privatisation
Reply #674 - Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:31pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:09pm:

no, it means CO2 and methane associated with the fossil industry are also major greenhouse gases.

No they are not. CO2 = about 420ppm (0.042%) by volume of the atmosphere. Methane = 1.2 ppm (0.00012%) approximately. And both are mostly covered by the IR of water vapour. Methane lasts about 10 years in the atmosphere.

But if you have figures that disagree, show them. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:09pm:

See the IPCC consensus.

The IPCC consensus says there is no discernible AGW present in the signal. I have shown you the graph before, but you still don't understand. Only in the highly unlikely RCP8.5 is there a discernible signal out to 2100. No emergency.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:09pm:

Indeed private sector greed is now hindering the transition, but if the climate keeps becoming more intolerable for humans as forecast by climate scientists, even you will be forced to shed your free market delusions.

Oh you mean those forecasts by climate scientists that have not come true? Any of them? No Sea Ice past 2013, Snowfall will be a rare and exciting event? Countries will be underwater from SLR prior to the year 2000? You mean those forecasts? Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 27^th, 2025 at 4:09pm:

Already did supply a link re steel/green ammonia. But google is on the case:

Yes, green steel is possible, but it's expensive to produce at scale and may not be commercially viable until the 2030s.

Note: But it WILL be...

Nope. That is your BELIEF. How many witches will need to be burnt at the stake before your religion folds? Wink

Why have so many companies thrown in the towel on Hydrogen? Why is it you won't say? Apparently 79% are stuck in limbo.

"In recent months, some of the biggest would-be developers of the fuel have canceled projects, axed orders and scaled back investment plans. The low-carbon fuel is simply too expensive to stimulate demand in many sectors of the economy."

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/environment/2024/10/04/energy/green-hydrogen-hype-f...

Back to top

IP Logged