PM urges renewables shift or risk being left behind   :)

Anthony Albanese says Australia must seize the opportunities presented by renewable energy.   :)
New Daily
Sep 15 2023

Anthony Albanese has told energy industry leaders Australia must move towards renewable energy or risk being left behind.

In a speech and panel discussion at NewsCorp’s Future Energy summit, the prime minister outlined his vision to transform the country into a “renewable energy superpower”.   

“The global shift to clean energy is Australia’s biggest opportunity for growth and prosperity,” he said on Friday.

“This is a decade in which we either move forward and seize the opportunities which are there, or the world will just go past us.”

Australia had immense potential due to its abundance of sunshine and wind alongside the availability of minerals critical to creating infrastructure necessary for renewable energy, Mr Albanese said.

He noted the importance of gas in the energy transition and said it would support the electricity grid during low renewable periods.

“It would not be responsible to just turn the tap off overnight as some would suggest,” he said.

“I am forecasting gas-generated power will play a key role in our energy system.”

Though the country’s transition to renewables has lagged behind other nations, the prime minister said the government’s commitment to reduce emissions 43 per cent by 2030 and hit net-zero by 2050 was an improvement.

“That’s a big step on where we were a few years ago, where we would have been having a debate of whether climate change is real, about the science, about whether the transition was happening.”

With debate over climate change’s existence having largely subsided, the country could move towards energy that was more sustainable and cheaper.

When asked if the Labor government would stick to its election promise to reduce power bills by $275 in 2025, he did not directly answer the question but maintained renewable energy could reduce costs.

“We know what happened with the invasion of Ukraine … but there’s no question that renewables will reduce prices. That’s why the investment is going there,” he said.

On Monday, unions, energy and environment groups called on the government to provide a $100 billion clean energy package to support Australia’s low-carbon technology manufacturing base.

What a load of utter shite. Renewables are inefficient, expensive and an environmental disaster, bring kept afloat by massive subsidies and deliberate suppression of the use of coal, gas and nuclear power.

The main sources of misinformation on Australia’s renewable energy transition are journalists from the ABC and the Nine newspapers.
...
Reporting about the renewables commitments of the No.1 and No.3 global CO2 emitters, China and India, is just as lacking. Too many environment writers focus on increasing renewables use while ignoring that both countries are expanding their coal capacity.

In fact, The Telegraph in London on September 6 said China had this year started on new coal capacity greater than the entire existing US coal fleet. Yet in much media here it is Australia that is the emissions pariah.

At least The Guardian was honest enough to publish the truth on August 29. Quoting analysis by the Global Energy Monitor and the Centre for Research of Energy and Clean Air, The Guardian said “… in the first half of 2023 (China’s) authorities granted approval for 52 gigawatts of new coal power, began construction on 37GW of new coal power, announced 41GW worth of new projects and revived 8GW of previously shelved projects.”

Yet ABC radio’s flagship morning current affairs program, AM, on September 11 reported – po-faced – that Australia was being left behind by China’s energy transition as renewables industry leaders here pleaded for subsidies to help compete with US President Joe Biden’s misnamed Inflation Reduction Act spending on US emissions reduction.
...
Indeed, China has been the biggest beneficiary of the global energy transition across the West, even though it has increased domestic coal consumption by 300 million tonnes a year and last year increased emissions by 10 per cent over the pre-Covid peak set in 2019, according to The Conversation on July 10.

It is the biggest emitter by far, has the fastest-growing emissions and yet is the winner from commitments in Europe, East Asia, North America and Australia to reduce their emissions. In effect, the rest of the world is exporting its industrial base to China for no net gain on global emissions.

In fact, several European car makers, including German giant Volkswagen, have warned in recent months that European car production is on the verge of collapse in the face of cheap imported Chinese EVs and conventional cars and soaring power prices in Europe.
...
Good journalists should cast a sceptical eye over the self-interested claims of people wanting government handouts to boost private profits. Many consumers don’t pay for their media, relying on free sources such as the ABC and The Guardian.

It is incumbent on such sources to test the claims of those who stand to profit from new technologies.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/journos-are-failing-the-public-in-their-reporting-on-renewables/news-story/c8f94b05bab2174b214cb025e9396804

https://headtopics.com/au/replacing-australia-s-retiring-coal-power-stations-with-small-nuclear-reactors-could-cost-387bn-an-44540946


Replacing Australia’s retiring coal power stations
with small nuclear reactors could cost $387bn, analysis suggests


17/09/2023 6:20 PM


The figure adds fuel to the growing political dispute over the pace and form of Australia’s energy transition The government said the new analysis showed a minimum of 71 small modular reactors – providing 300MW each – would be needed if the policy were to fully replace the 21.3GW output of Australia’s retiring coal fleet.

“According to the 2022-23 GenCost report modelling under the current policies scenario, this could cost $387bn,” a government summary said. “This is due to the estimated capital cost of $18,167/kW for [small modular reactors] in 2030, compared to large scale solar at just $1,058/kW, and onshore wind at $1,989/kW.”

The government said this would represent “a whopping $25,000 cost impost on each Australian taxpayer”. The minister for climate change and energy, Chris Bowen , said the opposition wanted to promote the benefits of “non-commercial” small modular reactor technology “without owning up to the cost and how they intend to pay for it”. headtopics.com

“Peter Dutton and the opposition need to explain why Australians will be slugged with a $387bn cost burden for a nuclear energy plan that flies in the face of economics and reason,” Bowen said.

"compared to large scale solar at just $1,058/kW, and onshore wind at $1,989/kW.” Let alone the additional requirement for storage. ::)