lee wrote on Jan 4^th, 2024 at 6:07pm:


Google has taken those things into account, and is assuming sufficient battery or other storage.
Nuclear currently produces c. 10% of global power; that could be easily doubled, allowing for excess renewables to be stored - and the sun is always shining (and the wind always blowing) somewhere on the  globe.

Quote:


It is a model of real, known money flows, unlike the unreal assumptions (eg DSGE models)  of mainstream economics which don't even consider the role of government debt in an economy.

Quote:


Unlike your criticisms of AGW, which may have merit regarding assumptions etc, they do not apply with Keen's graphical description (in Minsky) of the knowm money flows in an economy. But you can't understand that because you know nothing about economics - either the delusional mainstream version, or the correct (real)  MMT description of macro money flows.

Quote:


Spoken with the fervour of an ISIS theologian...

Quote:


The dollars aren't depreciated,  because the homegrown resources were available for purchase in the nation's currency, as noted above.

Yes, indeed the resources MUST be available for purchase (by the currency-issuer); which is a limit to the ability of the currency-issuer to purchase resources on a debt free basis. 

Therefore a reformed IMF/BIS will be required to allow ALL nations some of whom lack resources)  to exercise the non-inflationary power of a currency-issuer (via resources transfer) ; but Oz - like the globe -  has all the resources needed for the green transition.   

Quote:


Never say never: and if AGW projections are correct, debt free public money will become the reality sooner than you think.

Quote:


Pollution is real, and will require the 100% circular economy,  to solve the problem.

lee wrote on Jan 5^th, 2024 at 12:38pm:


You aren't keeping up; Vanadium  batteries on every city block will be able the store excess renewable energy needed in the night.

Quote:


No assumptions, just demonstrating the real outcomes  of real money flows; whereas mainstream DSGE theory is built on unrealistic assumptions.   

Quote:


No; Keen has the data for last year's money flows -  actual real data relating to the government, private domestic,  and external sectors ...


Quote:


Yes... it's fundamentalist nonsense, like mainstream economic DSGE dogma.

Quote:


You have ignored my outline of the requirments for a currency-issuer to be able to issue non-inflationary debt free money, ie  if the resources are available then indeed the debt-free-funded spending will increase the size of the economy wihout inflation.


Quote:


The pandemic and war wrecked supply; price controls should have been inplemented.  But the IRA is mostly a means of building supply chains outside of China, for geo-political reasons - tossing "free trade" principles overboard. 

Quote:


Wrong as always: China is already the world's fastest adopter of renewables, and both are committed to green by 2060.

More from JM's tripe...Plimer.

Who to believe? A bloke who puts his name to something or a person who doesn't.

But JM believes, so it must be ANON E Mouse.

The climate scam and it's consequences explained rather well:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEFmVgjdLfs

From The Spectator. The 'green' movement in a nutshell:

Why isn’t the media challenging the $60 trillion Net Zero cult?
Alexandra Marshall The Spectator Australia 4 December 2023
Those  who believe renewable energy will save the planet generally have very little understanding about what the apocalypse is meant to look like … or the engineering reality of the proposed solution. This is not a criticism. Climate Change is a political movement. The renewable transition is a collection of opaque policies and corporate deals negotiated in secret. Their failures are a matter for complex engineering reviews and guesswork.
Expecting anyone to understand something that has been deliberately blurred from public view is unfair.
Those who are curious enough to ask questions quickly discover that politicians have no idea what their policies mean in the real world. MPs and Senators struggle to make it through cover speeches written by their advisers, tripping over the big words and mumbling their way in and out of statistics that look fabricated or, at the very least, incomplete.
Net Zero 2050? ‘Decarbonisation’? They are bits of nonsense that look good on a campaign banner.
Political parties, mining companies, and tech firms are pilfering a fortune in public and private money to ‘do things’ that sound ‘green’ – almost all of which are damaging the environment. Is there proof that anything is truly ‘net zero’? No. ‘Carbon neutral’? That is gibberish. But no one asked for proof, so it doesn’t matter.
Where are, for example, the total costings of a wind farm over a 100-year period including ripping it out of the ground and re-building it every 25 years concealed under the feel-good heading ‘re-powering’? What about the construction and maintenance of transmissions lines, the building of the battery backup, and the replacement of that backup at least four times during the life of the wind farm? We haven’t seen that on any of Chris Bowen’s glossy press releases. His department did not include those costs when formulating the ‘cheap energy’ narrative. I am not suggesting that the Minister for Climate Change and Energy (notice the priority order in that title) is hiding the figures, I am suggesting the government has not bothered figuring them out.
Green-tinged governments were either too dumb or lazy to check the detail before signing over billions. They were bamboozled by pitch meetings given by a hungry private sector chasing a piece of the tens of trillions on offer in the energy transition. This negligence in duty is almost more depressing than conspiracy.
That said, the public are starting to realise that having their pristine landscapes draped in wires, blades, solar panels, and batteries is not the environmentally-friendly Utopia they were promised. The industrialisation of our beaches, rainforests, and oceans feels wrong. It looks wrong. It is wrong.
Under Chris Bowen and state Labor Premiers, Australia is vandalising its natural assets in service of backroom handshakes at international talk-fests – the purpose of which is to make money and empower dangerous foreign governments. Ask why mining companies would support a Net Zero ideology that pretends to hate the industry. Ask how much money these companies are making from publicly-funded grants for ‘green’ solutions. Ask how much the price of previously worthless minerals has increased now that they are used for the renewable industry. Ask how much they are making on Lithium with global government policy mandating the market create unsustainable demand. Ask who is making a fortune while pretending to close down… Ask who is keeping their fossil fuel and nuclear assets in the back pocket for a time when all this green zealotry runs out of belief… Ask who profits from your good will.
Australia’s soft-press is refusing to ask these meaningful questions or to risk embarrassing politicians either because they are incapable or, more likely, they want to protect their seat on the press bus (and clicks for their network).
Politicians and the press have developed a sick dependency on each other. Politicians are frightened of the press and the press has grown lazy and ideologically obedient. Yes, those of us who ask uncomfortable questions get quickly cut out of the media circuit and there is no requirement for politicians to suffer the indignity of a tricky interview.
Meanwhile, the independent press, who are at the door with claws and teeth, are held at bay by Silicon Valley tech giants who would prefer to work with the easily-manipulated status quo. Whenever they want another billion-dollar tech contract out of the government, they send memos to the press. It’s win-win-win for them.
Big Tech has teamed up with the Climate Change movement, expanding the pool of potential revenue upward of $60 trillion worldwide. When we take into account the money to be made from Big Pharma’s global health passports, Digital Identity, ‘smart’ cities, fake food, and 15-minute surveillance towns – the cookie jar of corporate sin expands beyond description.
The public asks why there is a consensus of lies and the answer is: money.
This money doesn’t belong to politicians – it belongs to us – and because there are no consequences for this lightweight political class, they are more than happy to wedge the door open for Silicon Valley in exchange for a friendly press and zero push-back to their mistakes thanks to ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ social media guidelines. cont:

Belgarion wrote on Jan 28^th, 2024 at 4:54pm:


Maybe because the never-ending simultaneous floods, droughts, temp.extremes  and storms around the globe are catching the media's attention....

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


Testing is not the same as proven.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:



And it still can't be relied upon. "past performance is no guarantee of future performance". 

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


You had a point? Apart from your lack of knowledge of course.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:



So that would be COP number 5230?

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


So now it is only supply chains diminished and Russia? Better tell the Houthis that.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


You would probably, but not necessarily, know there are many people who don't believe it. How does a bill that is so green it will never burn, become a USA protection method? They would need more fossil fuel use or nuclear to produce solar panels and wind turbine blades. In fact offshore wind is really on the nose, not just in  the USA, but elsewhere.

Semiconductor making needs a stable source of power, as do making turbine blades, making copper windings etc, etc.


thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:



It is not RAPIDLY reducing anything.

Not according to Statista.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/302233/china-power-generation-by-source/

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


Tell me when they actually show that. So according to you that is another 6 years of increasing coal use, but coal is inherently bad.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


Yes and claims are not worth the paper they are written on.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


No that's the anti-green stance of the people in India.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 11:13am:


So says the bloke that doesn't understand models, economics, engineering etc, etc.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


Ah dream the impossible dream. You still haven't figured out if it is paid for it is not free. And the batteries are not free either.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


So money flows in a real economy are static?

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


And yet it is you that can't explain it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


So to China it isn't urgent but to others it is? Got it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


Oh trade wars. Isn't that something that is supposed to be a thing of the past, as every one gets along. Kumbaya.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


But closing down fossil fuels will not achieve that. Subsidies only work when you have enough electricity to do something with. Degrowth of energy is not going to cut it, with EV's etc being an increasing drain.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


It hasn't worked in the real world yet. And nowhere is close to doing so.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


And yet the major builders of offshore wind are bailing as it doesn't pay enough.  Orsted, Siemens etc.

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


Ah yes. "Sufficient storage". Have you got a figure for that yet?

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:



At what percentage overbuild?

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


Exactly. Pie in the sky stuff. But you "believe".

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:


And yet we have headlines like "Over the next several years, many regions of the US and Canada may struggle to ensure a reliable electricity supply amid soaring energy demand from the tech industry and electrification of buildings and vehicles"

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2409679-much-of-north-america-may-face-elec...

The same thing is happening in the UK, in the rush to net zero.

"Wind Farms Are Overstating Their Output — And Consumers Are Paying For It"


"Electricite de France SA’s Fallago Rig wind farm near the Scottish border claimed that it would generate 27.1% more power than it did during the five-and-a-half-year period. Just a few miles away, Fred. Olsen Renewables’ Crystal Rig II wind farm said it would produce 35.5% more energy than it delivered. Ventient Energy, backed by JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s asset management arm, overstated the output at its Farr wind farm by 28.7%."

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-uk-wind-farms-overstate-output/

That overstatement of wind means they get paid more, but there is less available to the consumer.

"In 2020, even before the recent surge in energy costs, everyday Britons were paying about 75 percent more for electricity than Americans, the result of a double whammy—cap-and-trade policies on the one hand and renewable subsidies on the other. And then came the Ukraine shock. During the 2022 energy crisis, electricity rates for British businesses were more than double the average paid by U.S. businesses.

In Britain, the impact of cap-and-trade on the cost of fuel to generate electricity is massive. In 2022, government-imposed carbon costs averaged $128 per megawatt hour (MWh) for coal-generated electricity and $51 per MWh for natural gas. Those costs are on top of actual fuel costs, which averaged $150 per MWh for electricity generated from coal and $160 per MWh for natural gas. These mean that it cost $278 to generate 1 MWh of electricity from coal and $211 from natural gas."

https://www.heritage.org/energy/commentary/britains-disastrous-path-net-zero-war...

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 7^th, 2024 at 12:50pm:

And will actually achieve something?