4 ms·

Fingers crossed this happens. Currently we have a government thats talking up clean coal :(

by gonzo41 10y ago

posnet 10y ago
It is a sad day when a politician unironically holds up a lump of coal in parliament and pronounces look how clean it it.
- kogepathic 10y ago
  It also doesn't make any sense, as a number of studies have shown that renewables employ more people per MWh than fossil fuel energy sources like coal. [0] So if the politicians point is that renewables destroy jobs, the evidence does not support this claim. [0] https://web.stanford.edu/group/emf-research/docs/occasional_papers/OP64.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/group/emf-research/docs/occasional_...
  - fennecfoxen 10y ago
    > renewables employ more people per MWh than fossil fuel energy sources like coal. Anyone who suggests that's a feature, and not a defect, is either a fool or has designs on your wallet.
    - kogepathic 10y ago
      > So if the politicians point is that renewables destroy jobs, the evidence does not support this claim. My point isn't that more people employed = cheaper energy. Obviously that's not how economics works. My point was, if politicians are advocating for building out more fossil fuels because renewables "take away jobs" that argument has been proven false. [0] [0] http://fortune.com/2017/02/21/donald-trump-jobs-coal-mining-solar-energy/ http://fortune.com/2017/02/21/donald-trump-jobs-coal-mining-...
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- mirimir 10y ago
  Well, it did look like anthracite. So yes, not much carbon would have rubbed off on their skin. But still pretty stupid.
- weaksauce 10y ago
  Or when a politician holds up a snowball in congress unironically to prove climate change is not a concern.
  - mason240 10y ago
    Or when a politician uses a warm day unironically to prove climate change is a concern.
    - gjm11 10y ago
      I haven't seen that one. Who did that?
    - weaksauce 10y ago
      I haven't seen that one either... Got a source?
- zardo 10y ago
  Did he set it on fire?
nl 10y ago
Fortunately (?), the SA government is from the opposite party and has been blamed for the power outages, and would love nothing more than proving the Federal government wrong. Especially since their is a state election next year and this will be a major issue - there are already TV ads about it. The SA government has been in power for too long, and a change would be good, but the opposition party is just woeful. Last campaign they ran on the idea of the state funding the Adelaide Oval upgrade, but instead of building a new hospital (which we need) they proposed the idea of upgrading the current - asbestos ridden - one, while it was still operating. There was just no way that was a viable option - it was an entirely stupid plan, and they lost just like they deserved to. I was hoping for better this time, but currently they are planning on getting rid of the SA renewable energy targets, and using "clean coal". I just can't vote for that. (And ironically they also decided to oppose any nuclear industry or power in SA too.)

Fingers crossed this happens. Currently we have a government thats talking up clean coal :(

by gonzo41 10y ago

Fingers crossed this happens. Currently we have a government thats talking up clean coal :(

It is a sad day when a politician unironically holds up a lump of coal in parliament and pronounces look how clean it it.

kogepathic 10y ago
It also doesn't make any sense, as a number of studies have shown that renewables employ more people per MWh than fossil fuel energy sources like coal. [0] So if the politicians point is that renewables destroy jobs, the evidence does not support this claim. [0] https://web.stanford.edu/group/emf-research/docs/occasional_papers/OP64.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/group/emf-research/docs/occasional_...
- fennecfoxen 10y ago
  > renewables employ more people per MWh than fossil fuel energy sources like coal. Anyone who suggests that's a feature, and not a defect, is either a fool or has designs on your wallet.
  - kogepathic 10y ago
    > So if the politicians point is that renewables destroy jobs, the evidence does not support this claim. My point isn't that more people employed = cheaper energy. Obviously that's not how economics works. My point was, if politicians are advocating for building out more fossil fuels because renewables "take away jobs" that argument has been proven false. [0] [0] http://fortune.com/2017/02/21/donald-trump-jobs-coal-mining-solar-energy/ http://fortune.com/2017/02/21/donald-trump-jobs-coal-mining-...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
mirimir 10y ago
Well, it did look like anthracite. So yes, not much carbon would have rubbed off on their skin. But still pretty stupid.
weaksauce 10y ago
Or when a politician holds up a snowball in congress unironically to prove climate change is not a concern.
- mason240 10y ago
  Or when a politician uses a warm day unironically to prove climate change is a concern.
  - gjm11 10y ago
    I haven't seen that one. Who did that?
  - weaksauce 10y ago
    I haven't seen that one either... Got a source?
zardo 10y ago
Did he set it on fire?

nl 10y ago

Fortunately (?), the SA government is from the opposite party and has been blamed for the power outages, and would love nothing more than proving the Federal government wrong. Especially since their is a state election next year and this will be a major issue - there are already TV ads about it. The SA government has been in power for too long, and a change would be good, but the opposition party is just woeful. Last campaign they ran on the idea of the state funding the Adelaide Oval upgrade, but instead of building a new hospital (which we need) they proposed the idea of upgrading the current - asbestos ridden - one, while it was still operating. There was just no way that was a viable option - it was an entirely stupid plan, and they lost just like they deserved to. I was hoping for better this time, but currently they are planning on getting rid of the SA renewable energy targets, and using "clean coal". I just can't vote for that. (And ironically they also decided to oppose any nuclear industry or power in SA too.)