5 ms·

Pretty remarkable considering the governments pro-coal and anti-renewables tone and policy. Australia still generates more than half of its electricity using co

Pretty remarkable considering the governments pro-coal and anti-renewables tone and policy. Australia still generates more than half of its electricity using coal and even brown coal. Inevitably the same dynamics that are killing the coal power generation elsewhere will play out in Australia as well. Basically, periodic over supply of electricity because of solar leads to temporary shut downs of plants. That is expensive and makes these plants less profitable. That over supply comes both from renewable energy generated on the grid and home owners putting solar on their roofs. Each year there's more of it. And Australia gets a lot of sunny days. So, the pressure to shut down more coal plants just keeps on growing.

roenxi 5y ago
There is no such thing as pro-coal. There is pro-money. The more militant arm of the renewable lobby has been lying for decades, claiming that they are cheaper than fossil fuels. There is still a bit of confusion because now it might actually be true and a lot of people are reorienting. Nothing in particular stands between Australian businesses from going the most profitable (ie, cheapest to produce in a total cost sense) form of power. The Liberals just aren't going to subsidise it.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  Do fossil generators in Australia pay for their carbon emissions?
  - stephen_g 5y ago
    No. They did, but one of the first things the (yes, actually literally pro-coal) current Government did after being elected in 2013 was abolish the carbon price.
    - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
      Gillard, ironically, had fucking balls. Australia is a decade behind where it was 10 years ago - so, yep, we're fucking 20 years behind where we should be. And these corrupt cunts will be voted in again, I'm sure of it. cough Off-topic, but... NBN cough
      - tonfreed 5y ago
        Did you ever stop to think why they got voted out or do you just assume you're just smarter than everyone else?
        BLKNSLVR 5y ago
        I don't assume, and not everyone.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- danielheath 5y ago
  Not sure how 'no such thing as pro-coal' squares with passing a lump of coal around parliament and - instead of working on legislation - putting forward motions to praise how wonderful the stuff is. As far as it being a free market? For infrastructure projects of that scale there's no such thing. Policy dictates what is (and what is not) economical to build every bit as much as the underlying fundamentals.
  - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
    Photo of the honorable Prime Minister of Australia (only the Treasurer at the time however), Scott Morrison, proudly holding up a lump of coal in Australia's parliament.[0] I believe "don't be scared" was what his party said to the opposition at the time. And Barnaby Joyce, the deputy Prime Minister and leader of the conservative Nationals who stand for Christian family values, holding the very same lump of coal[1]. At this time, 2017, he probably hadn't yet publically admitted to having an affair with one of his assistants - who later got pregnant[2]. If Australia's political class hadn't already jumped the shark, this was it. [0]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-14/scott-morrison-holds-a-lump-of-coal-in-parliament/11867032?nw=0 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-14/scott-morrison-holds-... [1]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-07/barnaby-joyce-holds-a-lump-of-coal-in-the-house-of-representati/11942156?nw=0 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-07/barnaby-joyce-holds-a... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/07/barnaby-joyces-wife-natalie-speaks-out-about-his-affair-with-staffer https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/07/barna...
    - jamil7 5y ago
      Did they coat the coal in something? How did they not get grubby fingers from it?
      - pjc50 5y ago
        Probably the coal promoter who handed it to them had washed it, and maybe waxed it or covered it in fixative to make the publicity stunt work better. Bit of a metaphor for the whole process.
- foobar33333 5y ago
  No the government actually is pro coal. Its their whole marketing image and they have been trying to warp the market to stop the death of coal. AGL wanted out because it wasn't profitable and the government wouldn't allow it. They also tried to ban investment companies from not investing in fossil fuels because coal mine projects where having a hard time getting funding.
- verelo 5y ago
  The PM brought coal into a standing of the government to talk about how pro coal they were. https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2017/feb/09/scott-morrison-brings-a-chunk-of-coal-into-parliament-video https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2017/feb/09/scott-m...
- pjc50 5y ago
  Specific claims by specific named people that you are claiming are lies? The two have very different cost structures, but until recently it wasn't cheaper. It's just necessary if Australia doesn't want to get any hotter.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago
    Australia’s annual contribution to global CO2 emissions is something like 1.3%. Australia could stop emitting CO2 tomorrow and it’d have approximately no impact.
- frankbreetz 5y ago
  You should come to Kentucky, you will see a lot of these: https://secure.kentucky.gov/kytc/plates/web/LicensePlate/Index/440c390c-9f68-4ec6-b956-5785e1fee0d9#plateAnchor https://secure.kentucky.gov/kytc/plates/web/LicensePlate/Ind...

roenxi 5y ago

There is no such thing as pro-coal. There is pro-money. The more militant arm of the renewable lobby has been lying for decades, claiming that they are cheaper than fossil fuels. There is still a bit of confusion because now it might actually be true and a lot of people are reorienting. Nothing in particular stands between Australian businesses from going the most profitable (ie, cheapest to produce in a total cost sense) form of power. The Liberals just aren't going to subsidise it.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Do fossil generators in Australia pay for their carbon emissions?
- stephen_g 5y ago
  No. They did, but one of the first things the (yes, actually literally pro-coal) current Government did after being elected in 2013 was abolish the carbon price.
  - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
    Gillard, ironically, had fucking balls. Australia is a decade behind where it was 10 years ago - so, yep, we're fucking 20 years behind where we should be. And these corrupt cunts will be voted in again, I'm sure of it. cough Off-topic, but... NBN cough
    - tonfreed 5y ago
      Did you ever stop to think why they got voted out or do you just assume you're just smarter than everyone else?
      - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
        I don't assume, and not everyone.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
danielheath 5y ago
Not sure how 'no such thing as pro-coal' squares with passing a lump of coal around parliament and - instead of working on legislation - putting forward motions to praise how wonderful the stuff is. As far as it being a free market? For infrastructure projects of that scale there's no such thing. Policy dictates what is (and what is not) economical to build every bit as much as the underlying fundamentals.
- BLKNSLVR 5y ago
  Photo of the honorable Prime Minister of Australia (only the Treasurer at the time however), Scott Morrison, proudly holding up a lump of coal in Australia's parliament.[0] I believe "don't be scared" was what his party said to the opposition at the time. And Barnaby Joyce, the deputy Prime Minister and leader of the conservative Nationals who stand for Christian family values, holding the very same lump of coal[1]. At this time, 2017, he probably hadn't yet publically admitted to having an affair with one of his assistants - who later got pregnant[2]. If Australia's political class hadn't already jumped the shark, this was it. [0]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-14/scott-morrison-holds-a-lump-of-coal-in-parliament/11867032?nw=0 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-14/scott-morrison-holds-... [1]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-07/barnaby-joyce-holds-a-lump-of-coal-in-the-house-of-representati/11942156?nw=0 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-07/barnaby-joyce-holds-a... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/07/barnaby-joyces-wife-natalie-speaks-out-about-his-affair-with-staffer https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/07/barna...
  - jamil7 5y ago
    Did they coat the coal in something? How did they not get grubby fingers from it?
    - pjc50 5y ago
      Probably the coal promoter who handed it to them had washed it, and maybe waxed it or covered it in fixative to make the publicity stunt work better. Bit of a metaphor for the whole process.
foobar33333 5y ago
No the government actually is pro coal. Its their whole marketing image and they have been trying to warp the market to stop the death of coal. AGL wanted out because it wasn't profitable and the government wouldn't allow it. They also tried to ban investment companies from not investing in fossil fuels because coal mine projects where having a hard time getting funding.
verelo 5y ago
The PM brought coal into a standing of the government to talk about how pro coal they were. https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2017/feb/09/scott-morrison-brings-a-chunk-of-coal-into-parliament-video https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2017/feb/09/scott-m...
pjc50 5y ago
Specific claims by specific named people that you are claiming are lies? The two have very different cost structures, but until recently it wasn't cheaper. It's just necessary if Australia doesn't want to get any hotter.
- TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago
  Australia’s annual contribution to global CO2 emissions is something like 1.3%. Australia could stop emitting CO2 tomorrow and it’d have approximately no impact.
frankbreetz 5y ago
You should come to Kentucky, you will see a lot of these: https://secure.kentucky.gov/kytc/plates/web/LicensePlate/Index/440c390c-9f68-4ec6-b956-5785e1fee0d9#plateAnchor https://secure.kentucky.gov/kytc/plates/web/LicensePlate/Ind...