Anger over climate change betrayal by major parties    

New Daily
Sep 27, 2024


Labor and Plibersek have come under fire for approving the expansion of three coal mines.


The Albanese government has been slammed for allowing three coal mines to expand, but the opposition offers no better path to net-zero, according to critics.   

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s approval of the mines expansion in the Hunter Valley earlier this week, was met with anger from independent crossbenchers.


Monique Ryan, the independent MP for Kooyong, said the “major parties can’t be trusted to act on climate change”.    

“In 2022, Australia gave the Albanese government a clear mandate for immediate and effective action on climate change,” she said.

“This week, Tanya Plibersek greenlit three new coal mines.”


‘Locking in more climate pollution’
Amanda McKenzie, Climate Council CEO, said that seven coal mines have been given the green light since Labor won the 2022 federal election.

“Every decision like this betrays future generations,” she said.

“Our children will not forgive us for locking in more climate pollution for decades to come.”


The Climate Change Authority, a government body that tracks decarbonisation efforts, found Australia is not on track to meet its 2030 emissions reduction target.


Australia is projected to achieve a 42 per cent reduction in carbon emissions, 1 per cent below the goal, but that analysis did not factor in the approval of new coal mines.

Gavan McFadzean, from the Australian Conservation Foundation, said the move was “the opposite of climate action”.

“These coal mines will generate more than 1.3 billion tonnes of lifetime emissions which will undermine Australia reaching net zero by 2050,” he said.

“Whitehaven’s Narrabri coal mine alone threatens several iconic and threatened species such as the regent honeyeater, koala, Pilliga mouse and Corben long-eared bat.”

No alternative 
Peter Dutton’s admission that his nuclear-first plan would extend the shelf-life of coal power stations has consigned the country to a difficult road in meeting climate targets, regardless of who wins the next election.

Alison Reeve, deputy program director of energy and climate change at the Grattan Institute, said that it is “increasingly clear the Coalition’s nuclear policy would prolong Australia’s reliance on coal”.

“It appears the Coalition’s plan involves relying on coal to provide electricity while nuclear reactors are being built,” she said in The Conversation.

“Labor’s energy plan also relies on continued use of coal.”

battery coal origin
The Grattan Institute estimated that ageing coal mines would be kept in use for another 12 years under the Liberal Party’s plan.


Dutton said earlier this year that the party would not release 2030 emissions targets until the Liberal-Nationals Party wins the next federal election.

Instead, he insisted that his nuclear energy policy, where nuclear reactors were unlikely to be functional until the 2040s, is the only way Australia can abandon fossil fuels.

Many of the claims originally made by Dutton and his party around nuclear energy have been scrutinised by experts and found to be lacking in factual basis, resulting in revisions to the plan on the fly.

The timeline has expanded from somewhere between three years and a decade to 2035.

Taxpayers would pay for the reactors, not the private sector and the free market like Dutton originally promised.   

Up to the year 2000, coal was responsible for over 80 per cent of Australia’s electricity generation. Its share today for the country as a whole is under 50 per cent.

In 2000, we had among the lowest electricity prices in the world. We now have among the highest.

In 2000, Australia had a smoothly-functioning electricity system. The system is now tottering, with supply interruptions and regular threats of blackouts.

Fixing our electricity system requires a completely different way of thinking about it.

Electricity demand over the next 15 years – between now and 2040 – is likely to increase by 20-25 per cent. To meet this additional demand, we need new generating capacity.

This means new coal-fired plants. There are no other options for reliable, low-cost electricity.

Natural gas is in short supply in the eastern states and, in any case, is roughly twice the cost of coal for electricity generation.

Nuclear power, if accepted in Australia, will not be in place before the mid-2030s and will play no major role before the 2040s.

Wind and solar farms are not suitable as they cannot generate reliable electricity, given that cloud cover and wind are variable.

In addition, they are inherently expensive. This is because of high transmission costs (which form roughly 40 per cent of total electricity costs) and because the development of wind and solar farms to meet the needs of the grid requires serious overbuilding.

To illustrate the point on overbuilding, to match the electricity produced by one coal-fired plant of (say) 500 megawatts requires wind and solar farms and rooftop solar panels with total capacity of at least 1,500 megawatts.

The reason? Coal-fired plants can operate 85-90 per cent of the time, about three times the average for wind and solar farms.

Such overbuilding is enormously wasteful.

Conventional thinking requires that there should be a transition in Australia from coal to renewables.  The transition should be the other way around, from renewables to coal.
...

Judith Curry, a prominent US atmospheric scientist, ‘The climate system is way more complex than just something that you can tune with a carbon-dioxide control knob.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/09/a-radical-proposal-bring-back-coal/

And AGW is not a problem. Is not a climate catastrophe. If you think different provide proof.