Australian Politics Forum - Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › Federal Politics › Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17

Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target (Read 5635 times)

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #210 - Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm

lee wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 2:58pm:

Nope. No formal studies of ground types to determine if the ground is suitable. But keep talking about headlines rather than the actual contents. Roll Eyes

That's the ANU's job.

Quote:

That figure you keep quoting is the nameplate capacity. Solar output is about 30-35% of nameplate. So keep adding another one and another one. 30% of 40GW won't cut it. Roll Eyes

30%? So pull your finger out and build 3. The Suncable project planned to cover 12,000 hectares, ie, 1% of the NT's area.

Quote:

But AI is Artificial. It is supposed to be learning. If it only learns what it has been told, it fails.

Wrong again; AI can be programmed to calculate the optimal operation of dam levels, from full to empty, in the multiple storages.

Quote:

Yes successivley emptied and filled. But the need to be continually emptied and filled shows that Solar and wind can't cut it. Roll Eyes

Wrong again. Successive filling is powered by excess renewables in different locations (excess power when the sun is shining in the north, while not in the south, and vice versa, ditto for wind).

Quote:

Cheapest at $1.3 trillion? Grin

That figure includes storage. Nuclear only would cost as much, and be a decade too late.

Quote:

And now those same billionaires are rorting the system with "new" technologies. Grin

No they aren't: they ARE wanting government to lay down the rules guaranteeing them hefty returns on investment in sun and wind, while exiting fossils.

Quote:

First you have to have "excess renewables" far in excess of the limited excess. Wink

2MW excess won't push 20MW of storage. Wink

Roof top solar , home batteries and 3 ( there you go) Sun cables plus wind will produce lots of excess than can be stored.

Quote:

Hey. these are your German Green New Dreams, and now you cut them loose because it didn't work? Grin

The Green's New Dreams would have worked if their policies had been implemented, and Germany's nukes maintained.

Quote:

So now they have gone from beneficent billionaires to "greedy a*se"s. Grin

That's the private sector for you.

Quote:

And yet you want to commit to Weather Dependant Renewables. Grin

Using gas as the transitiion firming fuel while turning off coal, to find out if we need nuclear as well as batteries and pumped hydro.

Quote:

Yes they are. As is CCS and a whole lot of other Green Dreams. Wink

We need green (hydrogen based) steel, the technology only needs to reach commercial scale. CCS is worse than storing nuclear waste, CO2 can always leak out of the underground chamber.

Quote:

"contrary to the last EU election in 2019, when millions of young climate protesters took to Europe's streets, this year's campaign saw climate change usurped by issues including immigration, economic woes and struggling European industries."

ah...caused by your dysfunctional economic orthodoxy and the swing to the right (anti immigration etc) among young people who are equally as deluded as your mainstream economics. But Greta's crowd are as active as ever.

Quote:

So climate is NOT top of the pops. You are using your belief system again.

LOL - in your dreams: the fossil industry is DOOMED. Even Dutton is positing the exit from coal.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #211 - Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm

lee wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 3:04pm:

Cont.

...the share of young people who voted for the AfD jumped between the last European Parliament election in 2019 and this one (rising by 11 percent among voters aged between 24 and 30). In France, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party raked in some 30 percent of the youth vote nationally — a 10-point rise compared to 2019.

Already addressed: the failing national economies around the world leads to RW populism like the AfD and Trump and La Pen, for which your flat-earth mainstream economic orthodoxy is responsible.

Quote:

Which begs the question: Why are so many of Europe’s Gen-Z and younger Millennials — whose parents and grandparents espoused left-wing politics, ushering in the sexual revolution in the 1960s — embracing the antithesis of their elders’ ideals? And whatever happened to the stigma or shame that once surrounded overtly racist and xenophobic attitudes like those on display in the Sylt video?"

Explained above: "It's the economy, stupid".

Quote:

Addressed above. Wink

No you didn't: "capitalism sucks " is still alive among many youth, if not among the extreme right who are nevertheless struggling with housing affordability, lack of employment opportunites (both blamed on immigrants), and cost of living pressures.

Quote:

So now you expect Solar and Wind to never need replacing. Grin

Low IQ and dementia: you were talking about replacing renewables with nuclear, we may need both. Of course every energy source has a life span.

Quote:

TGD

you want to maintain the filthy fossil industry to ensure the survival of private sector profits.

Malcolm has NO expertise in Solar, Wind, Storage or Nuclear. He hasn't the knowledge to "prove" anything. Roll Eyes

We may need both.

Malcolm was PM with access to Oz's best minds on the topic - which proves we don't know - ie, there are divided opinions re whether we need nuclear in the long run (before fusion, that is) or not.

Quote:

And how does Nuclear become a "filthy fossil industry". But we know you kjeep talking bullschist because that is ALL you have. Roll Eyes

Low IQ and total confusion: Nuclear is zero emissions (therefore 'clean', apart from the stored waste), fossils are filthy in both climate-wrecking CO2 and other poisonous pollutants. Do try to keep up.

Quote:

Far more than Unreliables. Grin

So you agree we need zero emissions fuels far more than coal?

The beginning of wisdom, I suppose.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #212 - Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:27pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

That's the ANU's job.

No. The ANU is theoretical application, not physical application. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

30%? So pull your finger out and build 3. The Suncable project planned to cover 12,000 hectares, ie, 1% of the NT's area.

At 3 times the expense, and 3 times the storage expense. Remember what you said about MMT and inflation? Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

Wrong again; AI can be programmed to calculate the optimal operation of dam levels, from full to empty, in the multiple storages.

And AI can fail. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

Wrong again. Successive filling is powered by excess renewables in different locations (excess power when the sun is shining in the north, while not in the south, and vice versa, ditto for wind).

Ah yes, The sun is always shining somewhere and the wind is always blowing somewhere. That doesn't mean the solar and windfarms are where the sun and wind are. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

That figure includes storage. Nuclear only would cost as much, and be a decade too late.

The cost of Nuclear has been put at $8-10 million each for Large Nuclear not $80 million. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

No they aren't: they ARE wanting government to lay down the rules guaranteeing them hefty returns on investment in sun and wind, while exiting fossils.

And that is not GREED. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

Roof top solar , home batteries and 3 ( there you go) Sun cables plus wind will produce lots of excess than can be stored.

No it won't. Rooftop solar isonle effective about 5 hours a day.

3 Suncables is nameplate 60GW. 30% of 60GW is only 18GW. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

The Green's New Dreams would have worked if their policies had been implemented, and Germany's nukes maintained.

So it was Germany's knee jerk response to Fukushima that was responsible. Damn those left whingers are really dumb. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

That's the private sector for you.

And yet you have championed them. That makes YOU a gullible fool. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

Using gas as the transitiion firming fuel while turning off coal, to find out if we need nuclear as well as batteries and pumped hydro.

And Gas is a FOSSIL Fuel. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

We need green (hydrogen based) steel, the technology only needs to reach commercial scale.

So where will the carbon come from? And that's right though it is not at a commercial scale. Cue Dream the Impossible Dream. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

CCS is worse than storing nuclear waste, CO2 can always leak out of the underground chamber.

Eactly right and yet that is the preferred method of storage by dumb left whingers. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

ah...caused by your dysfunctional economic orthodoxy and the swing to the right (anti immigration etc) among young people who are equally as deluded as your mainstream economics.

So the young voters ARE leaving in droves. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 6:23pm:

But Greta's crowd are as active as ever.

And Greta has NO known science, but you believe and that is good enough. Roll Eyes

« Last Edit: Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:37pm by lee »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #213 - Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:36pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Already addressed: the failing national economies around the world leads to RW populism like the AfD and Trump and La Pen, for which your flat-earth mainstream economic orthodoxy is responsible.

And yet it is the left whingers who were leading the charge, not right wingers. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Explained above: "It's the economy, stupid".

The left whinger economies. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

And yet that was brought about by left whingers, whom you don't want to blame. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Low IQ and dementia: you were talking about replacing renewables with nuclear, we may need both. Of course every energy source has a life span.

Yes. Nuclear greater than 60 years, Solar maybe 25 years, wind maybe 20 years onshore. offshore 10-15 years. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Malcolm was PM with access to Oz's best minds on the topic - which proves we don't know - ie, there are divided opinions re whether we need nuclear in the long run (before fusion, that is) or not.

And Malcolm clearly didn't know. Alan Finkel as Chief Scientist was a neuroscientist. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Low IQ and total confusion: Nuclear is zero emissions (therefore 'clean', apart from the stored waste), fossils are filthy in both climate-wrecking CO2 and other poisonous pollutants.

Remember Gas is a FOSSIL fuel. So what are the POISONOUS pollutants> At what level are they poisonous and what is the current level? Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

So you agree we need zero emissions fuels far more than coal?

Coal is a limited and declinng resource. Haven't you learned anything. That is why RCP8.5, which is predicated on rapidly increasing coal use, is not feasible. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

The beginning of wisdom, I suppose.

For you I fear it is too late. Grin

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #214 - Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm

lee wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:36pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2024 at 7:01pm:

Already addressed: the failing national economies around the world leads to RW populism like the AfD and Trump and La Pen, for which your flat-earth mainstream economic orthodoxy is responsible.

And yet it is the left whingers who were leading the charge, not right wingers. Roll Eyes

Both sides are deluded by the current mainstream orthodoxy, as noted in Bill Mitchell's latest article (see the MMT thread):

The journey has to start with progressive organisations ........rejecting the mainstream macroeconomic narratives about the government being a household with financial constraints.

Quote:

The left whinger economies. Roll Eyes

No; actual economics, not your flat-earth variety.

Quote:

And yet that was brought about by left whingers, whom you don't want to blame. Roll Eyes

Wrong again: Thatcher's 'other poeples' money' BS wrecked the post war Keynesian welfare state economies which had created good public services affordable by all, until Friedman and Thatcher f**ked up.

Quote:

Yes. Nuclear greater than 60 years, Solar maybe 25 years, wind maybe 20 years onshore. offshore 10-15 years. Roll Eyes

100% recycling is necessary if we want to avoid drowning in our own waste in air, land and sea.

Quote:

And Malcolm clearly didn't know. Alan Finkel as Chief Scientist was a neuroscientist. Roll Eyes

Other advisers said nuclear IS required.

Quote:

Remember Gas is a FOSSIL fuel. So what are the POISONOUS pollutants> At what level are they poisonous and what is the current level? Roll Eyes

Dementia? We have covered it all before. Fossil pollution is destroying health.

(google)

But burning fossil fules creates climate change and releases pollutants that lead to early death, heart attacks, respiratory disorders, stroke, asthma, and absenteeism at school and work. It has also been linked to autism spectrum disorder and Alzheimer's disease.

Quote:

Coal is a limited and declinng resource. Haven't you learned anything. That is why RCP8.5, which is predicated on rapidly increasing coal use, is not feasible. Roll Eyes

Thanks for teaching us this (.....), so that leaves gas.....which also destroys health when combusted, as noted above.

Quote:

For you I fear it is too late. Grin

But hopefully it's not to late to save the planet from AGW-CO2, and your "market friendly" profit-gouging filthy fossil industry.

« Last Edit: Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:39pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #215 - Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:14pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

Both sides are deluded by the current mainstream orthodoxy, as noted in Bill Mitchell's latest article (see the MMT thread):

Ooh an MMT'er expounding on MMT. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

No; actual economics, not your flat-earth variety.

You mean Left whinger economies are not real economies? Go you. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

And yet it is the left that have further propogated those philosophies. Go figure. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

100% recycling is necessary if we want to avoid drowning in our own waste in air, land and sea.

And as you noted those solar and wind turbine manufacturers neet to do their own recycling. That drives costs up. So much for "cheap" renewables. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

Other advisers said nuclear IS required.

But you were the one lauding him for saying it was not necessary. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

Dementia? We have covered it all before. Fossil pollution is destroying health.

And yetr you can't cite a study that says that. Fossil fuels have given earth's population extended lifetimes. We are living beyond 40 years. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

But burning fossil fules creates climate change and releases pollutants that lead to early death, heart attacks, respiratory disorders, stroke, asthma, and absenteeism at school and work. It has also been linked to autism spectrum disorder and Alzheimer's disease.

And no link.Who wrote that drivel? You? Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

Thanks for teaching us this (.....), so that leaves gas.....which also destroys health when combusted, as noted above.

And yet you now want to use it in place of nuclear. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 5:31pm:

But hopefully it's not to late to save the planet from AGW-CO2, and your "market friendly" profit-gouging filthy fossil industry.

Poor petal. So much angst, so little substance.

BTW - did you do your sums on how many Suncables you would need to get your vaunted 40GW? it goes like this - 40GW/30% = approximately 14 Suncable projects. Cheap innit? Grin

BTW - you forgot your claim on Poisonous fossil fuels. Wink

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #216 - Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm

lee wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:14pm:

Ooh an MMT'er expounding on MMT. Grin

Confirming your flat-earth economics.

Quote:

You mean Left whinger economies are not real economies? Go you. Grin

Amazing - another one of your rare correct statements.

Quote:

And yet it is the left that have further propogated those philosophies. Go figure. Grin

Ideological blindness; Friedman and Thatcher weren't LW.

Quote:

And as you noted those solar and wind turbine manufacturers neet to do their own recycling. That drives costs up. So much for "cheap" renewables. Roll Eyes

See where your flat-earth economics leads you - and the Oz parliament who are arguing over which technology is the most expensive.

Your flat-eath economics would have the planet burning before you wake up (...be careful how you reply..you will reveal yourself as a fossil lover)

Quote:

But you were the one lauding him for saying it was not necessary. Roll Eyes

Low IQ; he is an example of disagreement among high office holders and among experts.

Quote:

And yetr you can't cite a study that says that. Fossil fuels have given earth's population extended lifetimes. We are living beyond 40 years. Roll Eyes

Yes, but now there are 8 billion of us trying to consume;
all-time high fossil fuel consumption is killing us. Do try to keep up.

Quote:

TGD:

And no link.Who wrote that drivel? You? Grin

The same people who exposed the tobacco industry.

Quote:

And yet you now want to use it in place of nuclear. Grin

Low IQ?

As a transition technology to ASAP 100% zero emissions - whether nuclear is required or not.

Quote:

TGD

But hopefully it's not to late to save the planet from AGW-CO2, and your "market friendly" profit-gouging filthy fossil industry.

Poor petal. So much angst, so little substance.

Er -- you forgot to refute the points made. Try again.

Quote:

BTW -

Yes... "BTW" , as a diversion from saving the planet from polluting fossil filth and AGW-CO2.

Quote:

did you do your sums on how many Suncables you would need to get your vaunted 40GW? it goes like this - 40GW/30% = approximately 14 Suncable projects. Cheap innit? Grin

You omitted rooftop solar (and then there's wind) :

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-21/rooftop-solar-cells-in-australia-to-outpe...

Staggering' rise of rooftop solar to put all other power generation in the shade, report finds

There is already almost 20GW of rooftop solar in Australia, but this is forecast to more than triple in coming decades.

According to Green Energy Markets, combined rooftop solar capacity will rise to 66GW over the next three decades, even under the most pessimistic scenario.

In scenarios where governments took more aggressive action on carbon pricing and incentives for green technology, the forecast uptake would reach almost 100GW over the same period.

By comparison, the total capacity of the NEM was about 55GW.

Google said suncable was planned to deliver 20 GW; but anyway, it seems small scale (roof-top) solar can supply more enegy than large scale suncable schemes, so 3 or 4 Suncable equivalents should be enough.

Quote:

BTW - you forgot your claim on Poisonous fossil fuels. Wink

I can't waste time on your dementia; we fully covered poisoinous fossil fuels and destruction of health, a couple a years ago.

Others can confirm the egregious reality of polluting fossil poisons on health status.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #217 - Jun 24^th, 2024 at 8:00pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Confirming your flat-earth economics.

Nope, Confirming your circular logic. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Amazing - another one of your rare correct statements.

And yet left whingers have been dominating in France, Germany, UK, EU generally. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Ideological blindness; Friedman and Thatcher weren't LW.

Those that folowed in their footsteps were. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

See where your flat-earth economics leads you - and the Oz parliament who are arguing over which technology is the most expensive.

You are the one saying renewables are "cheap". Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Your flat-eath economics would have the planet burning before you wake up (...be careful how you reply..you will reveal yourself as a fossil lover)

You must explain how a gas that is a fire retardant actually causes "planet burning". Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Low IQ; he is an example of disagreement among high office holders and among experts.

And yet you defger to so-called experts; but only as long as they agree with you. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Yes, but now there are 8 billion of us trying to consume;
all-time high fossil fuel consumption is killing us.

So give us the statistics. Not waffle, Cold still causes more deaths than heat. Of course that is only the Lancet. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

The same people who exposed the tobacco industry.

Ah. Now epidemiological studies can determine death causes. You do know tobacco and energy are completely different fields, they have entirely different people working them. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

As a transition technology to ASAP 100% zero emissions - whether nuclear is required or not.

First off you said nuclear then it was fossil fuel (gas) make up your little mind. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Er -- you forgot to refute the points made. Try again.

You haven't made any salient points, with references. Just your usual bullschist claims. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Yes... "BTW" , as a diversion from saving the planet from polluting fossil filth and AGW-CO2.

Nope you made a claim. Back it up. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

You omitted rooftop solar (and then there's wind) :

As I keep telling you rooftop solar is only good for about 5 hours. Are you really too dumb to understand? Roll Eyes

"AEMO warns of immediate gas shortfall threat as cold snap, renewable lulls and outages bite"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-20/aemo-warns-of-immediate-gas-shortage-risk...

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-21/rooftop-solar-cells-in-australia-to-outpe...

Ooh projections. Now all they have to do is guarantee it will be available when needed. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Google said suncable was planned to deliver 20 GW; but anyway, it seems small scale (roof-top) solar can supply more enegy than large scale suncable schemes, so 3 or 4 Suncable equivalents should be enough.

So now we are up to 4 Suncables, 24GW in an increasing energy environment. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

can't waste time on your dementia; we fully covered poisoinous fossil fuels and destruction of health, a couple a years ago.

Nope. You were hoplessly outclassed then as now. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

Others can confirm the egregious reality of polluting fossil poisons on health status.

Always others, Never you. Because you don't have the necessary skillset.

BTW - Did you know rain is naturally acidic? It only gets neutralised and alkalised once it hits the ground. Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 44008 Gender:	Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target Reply #218 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 8:00am "Matt Kean named head of Climate Change Authority" That headline alone is proof that Australia's response to the AGW wheeze is a total hoax. There is nothing in the whole world to which Kean or Bowen can possibly be the solution.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #219 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 11:46am

Frank wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 8:00am:

"Matt Kean named head of Climate Change Authority"

That headline alone is proof that Australia's response to the AGW wheeze is a total hoax. There is nothing in the whole world to which Kean or Bowen can possibly be the solution.

You showing your complete and utter ideological blindness. Deplorable.

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 19986
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #220 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 12:13pm

The Coalition and it's brain dead supporters claimed Global Warming was a hoax and Greenhouse gases were good for the environment....Now the denialists are claiming Nuclear Energy is the only thing that can save us from this looming catostrophy they claim is a hoax....The calim that renewable energy will destroy the environment and Nuclear is safe and cheap is a complete load of bullshit....The only reason Dutton is proposing Nuclear Energy is too argue the Coalition is serious about Climate Change whilst maintaining an opposition to renewable energy....The Coalition had a decade to run down Renewable energy only to replace it with the most expensive and long lasting envioromental impacts for centuries to come!!!

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-13/dutton-climate-2030-target-emissions-utur...

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

aquascoot Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 34127 Gender:	Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target Reply #221 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 12:59pm /
Back to top	428634544_3802209753335048_8496765393134870869_n.jpg (79 KB \| 1 ) IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12283
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #222 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm

lee wrote on Jun 24^th, 2024 at 8:00pm:

Nope, Confirming your circular logic. Roll Eyes

[quote]

A flat earther like you has no conception of reality, whether circular or in line.

[quote]And yet left whingers have been dominating in France, Germany, UK, EU generally. Grin

Like I said , no conception of reality; the EU is bound by flat-earth fiscal rules which is why the EU economy has been stagnant for decades.

Quote:

Those that folowed in their footsteps were. Roll Eyes

Wrong again, BOTH sides of politics fell into line which is why eg the UK's NHS is dysfunctional after 4 decades of neoliberalism - not that Starmer will be able to fix it after 14 years of Tory rule, because he is committed to Thatcher's low tax/government austerity delusion as well.

Quote:

You are the one saying renewables are "cheap".

Low IQ supporting blind 'market friendly' ideology; adoption of renewables and closing filthy fossils requires mobilzation of available resources.

"Cheap"/"expensive" is merely flat-earth economics

(hint: money is created out of thin air by the authorized government agencies , do try to educate yourself)

Quote:

You must explain how a gas that is a fire retardant actually causes "planet burning". Roll Eyes

Low IQ or bad faith actor: see the AGW-CO2 science.
(See, you revealed yourself as an AGW-CO2 denier).

Quote:

And yet you defger to so-called experts; but only as long as they agree with you. Grin

I agree - along with the majority of people around the world - with the majority IPCC consensus.

Quote:

So give us the statistics. Not waffle, Cold still causes more deaths than heat. Of course that is only the Lancet. Roll Eyes

The majority IPCC consensus has all the stats, you are in the minority in rejecting them.

Quote:

Ah. Now epidemiological studies can determine death causes. You do know tobacco and energy are completely different fields, they have entirely different people working them. Grin

Your error: your posited "epidemiological studies" as the sole studies re health-destroying effects of smoking is false. Bio-chemical studies are also relevant.

You stand exposed as a low IQ fraud.

Quote:

First off you said nuclear then it was fossil fuel (gas) make up your little mind. Wink

No: your blind, low IQ brain has created that false sequence of events; I alway said we should be rolling out renewables asap, and determone whether we need nuclear, and how much, as we approach 100% renewables.

Quote:

As I keep telling you rooftop solar is only good for about 5 hours. Are you really too dumb to understand? Roll Eyes

With the huge excess during that time stored in batteries, with big Suncable schemes in the Northern Oz deserts supporting the grid on cloudy days in the South.

And then there's wind; and the Oz grid can be interlinked with areas in which the sun is shining for 12 hours a day, with home batteries supplying night-time energy.

Quote:

aemo-warns-of-immediate-gas-shortage-risks-in-se-australia

That's because the SE still isn't connected to a couple of Suncable schemes, because of economic flat-earthers and AGW-CO2 deniers like you.

Quote:

Ooh projections. Now all they have to do is guarantee it will be available when needed. Grin

20 GW today isn't a "projection": and 100 GW in 3 decades is a certainty if low IQ flat earthers like you get out of the way.

Quote:

So now we are up to 4 Suncables, 24GW in an increasing energy environment. Grin

Correct, on the way to 100GW from rooftop solar alone.

Quote:

Nope. You were hoplessly outclassed then as now. Roll Eyes

Funny, coming from an economic flat-earth, AGW-CO2, and poisonous fissil-fuel-pollution denier.

Quote:

Always others, Never you. Because you don't have the necessary skillset.

Unfortunately, your blind ideology always rejects the evidence, and renders invalid any "skill set" you imagine you may have.

Quote:

BTW - Did you know rain is naturally acidic? It only gets neutralised and alkalised once it hits the ground. Roll Eyes

There you go - now you are claiming there is no such thing as damaging acid-rain caused by filthy fossil pollution, because "rain is naturally acidic".

Deplorable - confirming your low IQ.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #223 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:54pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Like I said , no conception of reality; the EU is bound by flat-earth fiscal rules which is why the EU economy has been stagnant for decades.

The EU is home of the Green Dream, dumbarse. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

And the left whingers could have fixed that. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Low IQ supporting blind 'market friendly' ideology; adoption of renewables and closing filthy fossils requires mobilzation of available resources.

And only those " available resources" of which you approve. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

"Cheap"/"expensive" is merely flat-earth economics

Nope. "Cheap"/"expensive" is also a comparison of quality. A windfarm that may last 20 years or a nuclear plant that will last longer then 60 years. But your ignorance of economics is telling. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

(hint: money is created out of thin air by the authorized government agencies , do try to educate yourself)

Yes and it never has to have a real value, like crypto. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Low IQ or bad faith actor: see the AGW-CO2 science.

So you can't expalin it. I knew that. But it shows you for the numpty you are. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

I agree - along with the majority of people around the world - with the majority IPCC consensus.

Oooh you agree with the majority. That is a comforting thought - NOT. The majority IPCC consensus is that there is no climate crisis, we are not on the "Highway to Hell". Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

The majority IPCC consensus has all the stats, you are in the minority in rejecting them.

And yet you never quote them.

I will give them to you again, try to learn this time.

This is what the IPCC Physical Science Basis shows at Table 12.12 Page 90.

1. High confidence except over a few regions (CNA and NWS) where there is low agreement across observation datasets.
2. High confidence in tropical regions where observations allow trend estimation and in most regions in the mid-latitudes, medium confidence elsewhere.
3. High confidence in all land regions.
4. Emergence in Australia, Africa and most of Northern South America where observations allow trend estimation.
5. Emergence in other regions.
6. Increase in most northern mid-latitudes, Siberia, Arctic regions by mid-century, others later in the century.
7. Decrease in the Mediterranean area, Southern Africa, South-west Australia.
8. Northern Europe, Northern Asia and East Asia under RCP8.5 and not in low-end scenarios.
9. Europe, Eastern and Western North America (snow).
10. Arctic (snow).
11. Arctic sea ice only.
12. Everywhere except WAN under RCP8.5.
13. With varying area fraction depending on basin.
14. Pacific and Southern oceans then many other region
Explanation for the index from page 90.

Doesn't look that scary. Nothing before 2050 using the discredited RCP8.5

It can also be found at https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12.pdf page 90of 160 or page 1856 of the whole report.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Your error: your posited "epidemiological studies" as the sole studies re health-destroying effects of smoking is false. Bio-chemical studies are also relevant.

That's for smoking. As I have said before the nicotine can be found in the lungs. Now show us the Bio-chemical studies for PM2.5. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

I alway said we should be rolling out renewables asap, and determone whether we need nuclear, and how much, as we approach 100% renewables.

And you are still weeded to the idea of renewables, even though they need replacing much more often than nuclear. "But it is all free money so it doesn't count" Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

With the huge excess during that time stored in batteries, with big Suncable schemes in the Northern Oz deserts supporting the grid on cloudy days in the South.

Huge stored amount? Tell us about the huge stored amount in SE Australia at the moment. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

And then there's wind; and the Oz grid can be interlinked with areas in which the sun is shining for 12 hours a day, with home batteries supplying night-time energy.

So tell us where the sun shines 12 hours a day. I am interested.

TBC

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17224
Gender: male

Re: Coalition To Dump Australia's Climate Target
Reply #224 - Jun 25^th, 2024 at 2:02pm

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/maps/averages/sunshine-hours/
Hours sunshine - NO average 12 hour days.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

That's because the SE still isn't connected to a couple of Suncable schemes, because of economic flat-earthers and AGW-CO2 deniers like you.

It still has rooftop solar. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

20 GW today isn't a "projection": and 100 GW in 3 decades is a certainty if low IQ flat earthers like you get out of the way.

20GW today doesn't exist. Therefore it is a projection. Roll Eyes

100GW in 3 decades, that is slower than building nuclear at more than 100GW. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Correct, on the way to 100GW from rooftop solar alone.

But you just said that in the SE it wasn't working, make up your mind. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Funny, coming from an economic flat-earth, AGW-CO2, and poisonous fissil-fuel-pollution denier.

Still stuck on your preferredmethod of attack I see. No facts, just opinions, which are valueless. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

Unfortunately, your blind ideology always rejects the evidence, and renders invalid any "skill set" you imagine you may have.

And yet I cite science and you don't. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 25^th, 2024 at 1:00pm:

There you go - now you are claiming there is no such thing as damaging acid-rain caused by filthy fossil pollution, because "rain is naturally acidic".

Where did I claim that? You really need to comprehend the written word. Grin

IP Logged

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page