lee wrote on May 17^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:


Yes, charging consumers for their own free energy produced by the sun is the mother of all market failures.

If AGW climate change predictions are real, the BIS/IMF will have to buy the entire global  fossil fuel industry, to enable transition to renewables ASAP in ALL countries regardless of resource endowment. End of the free market.

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:


How do you export power in the evening when their is little or no sunlight ??

They already rip people off when there is excess energy on the grid. Why don't they give that excess energy away to the neighbours for free ?? This is what privitization does

Bobby. wrote on May 17^th, 2024 at 5:15pm:


They lied to us when they said that if they remove and replaced the old mechanical meters that gave parity on feedins that we would save $$$$$ with these new dumb meters. Nothing could be further from the truth. These pollies are lying pieces of sh.t

This has to be a f..king joke.

If I was in aus and wanted to invest this way I would go for batteries, change my wiring and go low energy lights ...etc so I only used my own power always first and  only when that was depleted would I draw on the grid. basically I would want to stop using them and paying them where possible. I would have a system that calculated how much power I need until morning and then push to grid so they nearly always pay me.

Screw them.

Setanta wrote on May 18^th, 2024 at 8:38pm:



There was some inquiry about it which the electricity providers won.
Their argument was that a major cost of theirs was the upkeep of the
power lines and if the feed in was 1 to 1 it wouldn't be fair.

Setanta wrote on May 18^th, 2024 at 8:54pm:



Maybe?

and maybe they bribed the inquiry members?   

thegreatdivide wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 12:45pm:


So tell us the successes of BIG government. USSR perhaps?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 6:27pm:


The USSR was Socialist. There is no need to transition to a green economy. But perhaps you have a global economy that has embraced this "green economy"? Not the UK. The workers are against it because of job losses. No "high paying jobs", nothing at all really.

"n a move which has been remarkably underreported in England, the union Unite has launched a campaign against Labour’s policy of refusing licences for new oil and gas extraction in the North Sea.

The campaign, called ‘No ban without a plan’, demands that Labour suspends the policy. If successful, it means a future Labour Government would continue, like the Conservatives, to grant new licences, until it has come up with a plan to create at least 35,000 new ‘energy transition jobs’ in Scotland – equivalent to the current roles held by oil workers. The union’s General Secretary Sharon Graham has accused Keir Starmer of following a policy which would allow Britain to “be held to ransom by Saudi Arabia or other nations” and adds:

“Labour needs to pull back from this irresponsible policy. There is clearly no viable plan for the replacement of North Sea jobs or energy security… Unite will not stand by and let workers be thrown on the scrapheap. North Sea workers cannot be sacrificed on the altar of Net Zero.” "

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/labour-and-unite-go-to-war-over-oil/

thegreatdivide wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 6:27pm:



And those governments struggling that are not a part of "the current dominant neoliberal 'small government' ideology "?

BTW - "nearly every nation" is not universal.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 1:06pm:


Nope not socialist.

"    While China is generally regarded as a socialist country, it is arguably also a communist country (as the ruling political party's name, the Chinese Communist Party, suggests).
    Moreover, many economists argue that China's economic ideology is actually closer to capitalism, though current leader Xi Jinping is making an effort to move the country back toward socialism."

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/is-china-a-socialist-country

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 1:06pm:


Whereas China merely has millions malnourished and homeless.

"However, large pockets of poverty still exist – especially in remote, mountainous areas – and there are large income disparities and gaps in nutritional status between rural and urban areas. Almost 150.8 million people are malnourished. Given the size of China’s population, rates of 9.4 percent for stunting in children, 19.6 percent for anemia and 25 percent for overweight represent significant national and global burdens."

https://www.wfp.org/countries/china

Homeless - 2.5 million

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/homelessness-by-country

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 1:06pm:


From where do you get your lack of figures? The IPCC says that there is no increase floods and droughts. And people have alweays died in floods and droughts. Glaciers advance and retreat, that is it common path. Hannibal could not have crossed the Alps with elephnats at the current level of ice and snow. What does that tell you?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 1:06pm:


But you don't have the necessaryt logic or knowledge. You can't even admit  Keen uses models. Let alone explain his assumptions.



thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 1:06pm:


So you can't show it. Thanks for that.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


So it is NOT currently a socialist state. Thank you for that.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


I gave you the references. Take it up with them.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


That would be a "solution" if it was feasible and necessary.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


So huge government spending that is not inflationary.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


That is the Physical Science Basis. But we know you don't do science, just feelings.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:



He uses assumptions as I have previously shown. That makes them models. Models which can not be verified into the future, as I have also previously explained. But then you don't do accounting either, so you waffle on.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


Only in your view. Models are not proof of anything.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:05pm:


Oh I understand, far better than you.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


You were the one saying it was a socialist state.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


I quoted a reference. Currently, they say 56 million live in poverty. How is that a lie?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


And yet you haven't shown it to be either.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:



Such a noddy. Just your scrambled thinking.



thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


Yes. All the way from benign to alarmist.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:



Ah says the arch fool, who can't do accounting, or modelling.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


A description by whom? 

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 3:59pm:


And you trust governments to balance that supply and demand?

Chalmers $9.3 billion surplus on the back of an increase in net debt by $52 billion. You should be a comedy writer.

The IPCC has a consensus?

Well according to the Guardian they do.

Apparently 77% of 383 out of 843 "climate scientists" agree.  And an opinion survey is not science. Except there are notably some quite specifically mentioned who are not.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-cli...

"“‘I am starting to panic about my child’s future’: climate scientists wary of starting families,” claims one headline based on the survey. According to the article, the victim of the panic is a Professor Lisa Schipper, whom Carrington describes as “an expert on climate vulnerability”. Schipper’s profile, however, reveals her actual occupation: “I am particularly interested in socio-cultural dimensions of vulnerability, including gender, culture and religion, as well as structural issues related to power, justice and equity.” "

So AGW is now a religion.

"“[Climate change] is an existential threat to humanity and [lack of] political will and vested corporate interests are preventing us addressing it. I do worry about the future my children are inheriting,” said Lorraine Whitmarsh, at the University of Bath in the UK."

ttps://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2024/may/08/hopeless-and-b...

"According to her academic profile at Bath, She did a BA in Theology and Religious Studies with French at the University of Kent, graduating in 1997. She followed this with a Masters in ‘Science, Culture and Communication’, before completing a PhD in Psychology in 2005. Now Director of the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST), Whitmarsh researches “perceptions and behaviour in relation to climate change, energy and transport” and “regularly advises governmental and other organisations on low-carbon behaviour change and climate change communication”.

So a religious scholar but not a climate scientist. oh dear.

tallowood wrote on Aug 10^th, 2024 at 12:01pm:


Does the yarmulke guy have an alibi?

tallowood wrote on Aug 10^th, 2024 at 12:29pm:


No sh1t!

Is Talloowood p1ssed on because he borrowed it and was wearing it at the time.

Was this a fecal Hannibal attack on Tallowood for allowing himself to be captured.

tallowood wrote on Aug 10^th, 2024 at 12:46pm:


No sh1t?

While Tallowood wore it during a Hannibal attack on Tallowood?

... Or did Tallowood experience a violent vomit release of poisonous noxious propaganda that had previously been pumped into Tallowoods head?

Bobby. wrote on Aug 10^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:


I am being Hannibalized by a sinister cultist cabal.

Quote:


Have to physically disconnect from grid to stop paying "Service to Property Charge".

tallowood wrote on Nov 26^th, 2024 at 12:39pm:


It's unclear. but

"If I had one, two, three [kids] here over summer, the bills could be as high as $2,000."

To deal with the shock, a couple of years ago Kerry Bradbury took a radical step — she installed batteries, new solar panels and a heap of smart tech in her home.

So, her power bills are $2k a year (with her kids regularly turning up for extended stays), so after 14 years the system has paid for itself.

And after that - if we can deal with the conflicts of interest between providers, wholesalers, retailers, and consumers, there is a "goldmine" of data which can be used to reduce costs to consumers. 

tallowood wrote on Nov 26^th, 2024 at 2:30pm:


Hopefully they have replaced diesel generators with PVs (and batteries)...

tallowood wrote on Nov 26^th, 2024 at 6:06pm:


People sometimes have to go  without power for days when a fossil powered grid goes down too....

I won't be worrying about backup.

Jasin wrote on Nov 26^th, 2024 at 11:01pm:


Well if everyone (those who can)  had rooftop solar and and batteries, there wouldn't be any power shortages this coming summer.

And most EVs are not being driven at the same time; VtoG EVs  might even be a net benefit for the grid, with excess solar (after house and car batteries are fully chatged,   being sent to the grid.   

lee wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 2:48pm:



$28K for solar and batteries is not pocket money.   

Bobby. wrote on Nov 27^th, 2024 at 3:02pm:


Correct, that's why the government should pay for householders' solar kits.

Hint: deficits and debt aren't a problem for a currency-ssuer, if the needed reources for the job are available for purchase by the governement.

You won't be able to explain how government-subsidized home solar kits would cause inflation; in fact a government owned energy system would reduce the price of energy to near zero, when the system is powered by sun and wind.

lee wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 3:53pm:


No,  the smart technolgy that will ensure the cheapest electrity, if greedy private sector producers and sellers are shut out of the system.

Quote:
 

Of course, and without the expense to consumers of greedy private setor profit-seeking price gougers.


Quote:


Low IQ: an interconnected grid, and VtoG EVs,  covers the entire country.

Quote:


It would be good if YOU read more than the headlines.... 

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


And yet, once again, you offer no proof. Consensus isn't proof of anything. But you still haven't answered the questions.

1. What do the consensus climate scientists agree on?

2. What do the consensus climate scientists disagree on?

3. What do consensus climate scientists admit they don't know?

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


And yet you show little if any intelligence.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


Both theories. One that has worked for over 150 years and one that hasn't worked anywhere.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


So you want rooftop solar, large scale solar, largew scale wind all inegrated. Got it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


So how are you going to integrate them? WIFI?

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


That must be why EV production is being slowed. By Volkswagen etc, because of the extremely fast uptake.

Increasing EV sales as a percentage increase is not how it is really done. Look at EV sales VS ICE vehicle sales.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 1:21pm:


I have applied logic. You merely have your "feelings".