rss
132

Lunar right go crazy over “genocidal” wind turbines and solar power

Print Friendly

Conservatives are not giving up fossil fuel power without a fight – and a solid dose of extremist remarks.

In the US, we have Donald Trump extolling the virtues of “clean coal” – a product that doesn’t actually exist. In Australia we have deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce saying that Australia has a “moral” duty to export coal to provide power to the poor in India. And on Murdoch media, we have got the lunar right railing against “genocidal” wind turbines.

Starfish_Hill_wind_farm_600

Of course, not all is lost. The CSIRO and the network owners recognise that 100 per cent renewable energy is eminently possible by 2050, and it will be significantly cheaper too. But, they say, we need to reframe market rules and policies now.

The new head of the Australian Energy market Operator, Audrey Zibelman, is in full agreement. She says the transition to a cheaper, cleaner, smarter and more reliable grid is inevitable, and is going to happen a lot quicker than anyone things. And it will be centred around consumers.

On the right however, they don’t understand the significance of “clean”, and simply don’t accept that renewables could provide a cheaper, smarter and more reliable grid than their preferred coal, gas and nuclear plants.

cf47806d2df89526feddb3ebe47f2b64“If you want clean power, go nuclear,” proclaimed Joyce on the ABC Q&A program on Monday, after railing about protests against the Adani coal mine.

And on the subject of coal, Joyce went from “economic pragmatist” to moral theorist:

“I’m going to be a complete economic pragmatist. We have to make sure this economy works. We have to export dollars. One of our largest exports is coal,” he said. “We have to realise we have a moral responsibility to other people in other nations to keep their lights on.”

Er, no, if the poor in India want access to electricity, then solar is their answer. To use coal, they need to connect to the grid, and in Australia we have seen how expensive that can be. So-called cheap coal is now delivered to the doorstep with a mark-up of nearly 1,000 per cent. The old centralised grid is outdated and undercut by new technologies.

And at the large-scale, imported coal cannot compete in any case. Large-scale solar costs are tumbling. The India energy minister insists, and has said this repeatedly, that he wants Indian to be done with coal imports within a few years.

Pixyish Goyal even wants the country to go “full electric” for vehicles by 2030,  and the latest government data suggests that India added twice as much renewable energy capacity than thermal capacity over the last 12 months.

But Joyce seems quite moderate when compared with the right wing commentators hosted on the Murdoch media, in print and on air.

On the Bolt report, Rowan Dean was having a good laugh with the host about genocidal wind turbines:

“Let me remind you that every year in Australia, at least 2,000 birds are killed by windmills. In Germany, Andrew, it’s 6 million birds every year killed by renewables, by windmills. In America, it’s a couple of million every year,” Dean said on the Bolt Report on Sunday.

“So if anybody has blood on their hands, Andrew, it’s the Greens, it’s people like Adam Bandt, who have forced these genocidal bird holocaust machines across our landscape.

“And yet, they sit there gleefully putting more and more of them and telling us they’re doing it for the good, when… it makes no difference to global temperatures, and they are massacring birds and they are destroying jobs for no difference to global temperatures.”

Those claims have been debunked so many times it is ridiculous. If you want to find out who is killing birds by the millions, ask the neighbourhood cat. They kill billions of birds each year.

Kobad Bhavnagri, the lead analyst for Bloomberg New Energy Finance in Australia, said there was a “continuous narrative” paraded around Australia that coal was cheap, clean and reliable.

“This is an imaginary world that the proponents live in,” he told the Australian Emissions Reduction Summit in Melbourne on Tuesday, noting that they were convinced new coal generation would be underpinned by cheap finance, and that it is now clean.

“The real world is that new coal in Australia is incredibly expensive. And that’s because financing would be very, very costly. Banks don’t want to touch it. Equity investors also don’t want to go near it. …The cost of coal would be $125-$169, which is higher than the cost of wind and solar paired with battery storage.

“And, of course it is not clean. The notion that ultra-supercritical coal is clean is, frankly, a lie.”

And gas won’t provide much of a solution either. The company with the longest history with gas, AGL (Australia Gas Light Co), on Tuesday killed off the idea that gas would be the “transition fuel” in Australia, saying that new baseload plants cannot compete with the low cost of wind and solar and battery storage.

Meanwhile, back at the ABC, Joyce was pressed by a Q&A audience member to explain his own thoughts on climate change.

“Of course, if human activity is putting greenhouse gases – and it does – into the atmosphere, then of course that has an effect on the climate,” he said.

“They [activists] always take the next step and say ‘that cyclone was climate change, that bushfire was climate change’, everything. And it’s not. It’s part of the natural path of what happens in the climate all the time, for which part of the effect are greenhouse gases.”

Peter Castellas, the head of the Carbon Markets Institute, which is hosting the emissions reduction summit, also saw Joyce on Q&A, and witnessed his attempts to define his position on climate change, as well as on coal and renewables.

“I was watching Barnaby Joyce on Q&A last night and I wondering where he was coming from,” Castellas told the opening of the CMI’s two day conference in Melbourne, that is attracting state and federal environment ministers and hundreds of other delegates.

“I think he was confused. This a narrative he hasn’t quite got is head around … he was struggling to connect with his subject matter.”

But Castellas said it raised an interesting and long standing problem, how to get the issues around climate change, and the possibilities of clean energy – the biggest economic opportunity of our lifetime – into the mainstream, and to win over the detractors.

“How do we speak to National MPs in their language … and not communicate it in a way that just reinforces the position they already have?” Castellas asked.

“I think that people like Joyce are open to being more informed on how to recalibrate their own position on climate change. That is an interesting opportunity.”

Of course, that has long been the issue. But some are just not interested in listening. Vested interests and ideology prevent them from doing so.


Missed the Energy Insiders podcast? Listen to it here:

  

Share this:

  • Robert Comerford

    Is it our moral duty to help place like India continue to overpopulate their country?

    Amazing!

    • Jo
      • Paul Wittwer

        The facts are that India’s population is still growing by around 16 million per annum, as it has averaged for the last 10 years. India has one of the lowest ecological footprints on the planet at 1.16 gha/person yet they still have an ecological deficit of 0.71 gha/person. It is India that has a moral duty to the rest of the world to curb it’s population growth and it’s use of fossil fuels.

        • Jo

          Wow, and all that for you to keep your western standard of living. Very just.
          And about moral obligation. Where is your moral obligation to make your carbon footprint similar to the carbon footprint of a person in India?

          • Paul Wittwer

            It is ridiculous to suggest that Australians should reduce their ecological footprint to that of Indians as the very minimum required to run a civilisation with adequate transport, energy, healthcare, education, sanitation and culture is well above the 1.16 gha/person. Australia is not yet over-populated in purely ecological footprint terms but we most certainly have a moral obligation to reduce both our ecological footprint and our population growth.

          • Jo

            Not sure what is the purpose of your rant as it is off topic to the article. I think to make people starve to regulate population growth is imperialistic.
            How are we to tell other countries to limit their population growth if we (Australia) grow much faster and have per capita a CO2 footprint 10 times the size of people in developing countries?
            We, the western countries have pumped most of the CO2 into the air that is now causing climate change.

            Also not sure why you jump onto ecological footprint if the article is about renewable energy (hence carbon footprint) in the context of climate change.

          • Paul Wittwer

            My post is not a rant as defined by the dictionary so you have obviously invented a definition for the purpose of abuse. I quite enjoy refuting nonsense when I see it and you posted nonsense. Carbon footprint is a subset of Ecological footprint so my post is entirely relevant to the article. My post is also relevant to Robert’s post at the beginning of this thread which was not about telling India to do anything but about whether it’s our moral duty to assist India to continue to overpopulate. Can you point to any part of the thread where anyone suggested starving or is that another of your inventions.

      • Miles Harding

        It’s a amazing what education and pragmatic public policy can do.
        I suspect that consumerism has less of a grip on the Indian population than is the case here. It’s possibly a good thing to being too poor to buy consumer ‘stuff’.

        Meanwhile, here in the west, the only way forward is to expand the ponsy scheme we call a consumer economy.

  • RobSa

    Just as coal powered stations are being shunned and rejected so to with needless fossil fueled travel. Being attracted to a destination will not be enough to justify someone else paying the social costs of transport in the future. Polluters as well, not just their enablers, need fettering by decent people, just as much as Trump and Barnaby Joyce.

  • Rob

    To think that the COALition is, according to Barnaby, concerned about poor people in India and that’s why we should keep selling them coal is just another fantasy from the government that is quite simply…ludicrous.

    • Chris Fraser

      It doesn’t seem to have the same ring as having the moral responsibility for tertiary education in Australia. The government comes up wanting on both assessments.

    • Farmer Dave

      Yes, their concern about poor people outside Australia is so great that they have repeated reduced the foreign aid budget.

  • trackdaze

    Loony not lunar.

    • Miles Harding

      From the same root: Luna, the roman goddess of the moon.

  • DJR96

    “economic pragmatist” – will conclude:-
    1.) Coal will be exported for as long as there is a willing market. The purpose is irrelevant.
    2.) New electricity generation will be whatever is cheapest. And that is no longer coal or gas.

    • gth_au

      And ausGrid will continue to be in pre-IPO grooming mode as the mutton it is, is dressed up more and more as lamb by cost cuts to maintenance that were previously only suffocating future capacity planning, then safety margin management, and now moving into the realm of public risk due to catastrophic equipment failure through knowingly operating equipment beyond manufacturer limits for much longer periods than documented, not replacing obsolete/under-capacity/failing equipment… not to mention their workforce changes and restrictions on responsiveness to curtail cost – which means no one is available to perform the required infrastructure refresh at the hours it needs to happen.

      PS: proof read the article again: *things=thinks, as one example.

    • Thucydides

      Our pressing problem is governments owned by vested interests that tilt the table so the market is not operating fairly. Look at the subsidies Big Coal gets from the LNP – the largest of which is their licence to freely pollute. Yes, they are fighting a rearguard action but the science tells us that time is of the essence. Their foot dragging is literally putting everything at risk.

      • DJR96

        Actually, it’s kinda the other way around, especially here in Qld. The Qld State government owns much of the coal-fired generation and is making as much money out of it as possible. They could easily drop energy prices dramatically by not demanding so much revenue from them. It’s all a big fat stealth tax that they’re addicted to. So they’re as responsible as any for resisting any transition to renewables. And that’s a Labor govt! But we all know they can’t organise a piss-up in a brewery, never mind have the integrity for anything.

  • Chris Schneider

    your last statement “Of course, that has long been the issue. But some are just not interested in listening. Vested interests and ideology prevent them from doing so.”
    Some of the tone many Greenies have had for a very long time is quite condescending and NO one listens to a smart ass. It’s moderates like Turnbul and a like who will get this moving. Pages like your’s continue to paint what he is trying to do in a bad light. Is it not where we need to be? yes! Is it better than ANY other Liberal leader would do? YES. Just like the question of gay marriage if you want to get it done there needs to be a little bit of work! Malcolm has been moving the right for his ENTIRE political career, If Turnbul is removed as Liberal leader. It’s the LEFT that will be at fault. The right will again take over the party and COAL will be shouted from every Liberal roof top. Turnbul has almost made the political manoeuvre of a Century moving the Liberal party to where they need to but instead of talking about the Hydro scheme as a great move in the right direction you cry about it not being YOUR choice. It takes time. You need to start crediting those on the right for movement make them feel the support and you will see more movement. Continue to talk down to them and you will KILL the movement!

    That is where the Greens have gone wrong for so long. It’s not been their political movement that has moved the common man it’s the undeniable facts. It’s actually the Greens that have stifled the movement because so many people are tied of fighting their ideology, this is really where climate denial comes from.

    The best thing for me now is, I say “Even if you don’t believe in climate change, economically Solar and wind are cheaper. So you have to choose the more expensive options that might also be doing harm”

    If they then talk about baseload well, That’s where Hydro comes in. It’s easy to explain and even easier to demonstrate. using YOUR website you can see the Hydro supply modulating to provide the consistency other renewables can’t. If this was coupled with Battery storage for extremely quick response you would have an energy system which is almost bullet proof. The more storage our network has the better. If we can get the Hydro Schemes done in five years we will have a very resilient energy grid.

    Rant over

    • Barri Mundee

      Turnbull had the opportunity to define his own agenda when Abbott was leading the Coalition to almost certain defeat. He could have given his party a choice: either allow me to implement my more progressive and popular agenda or stick with Abbott.

      • Chris Schneider

        LOL. He did that last time he was leader and got crucified for it (by both sides). This time he is taking a measured approach. Remember he is the leader of a party. The party is who runs the country. This means we live in a democracy not a dictatorship. If he was to try to do what you say he would be leader Abbott would. Who would be better? A Climate denier or someone who is trying to change the mind of his party?

        • Farmer Dave

          Great thesis, Chris, but I see no evidence that he is “trying to change the mind of his party”. Do you have such evidence?
          The other problem with this thread is that we are running out of time to gently persuade people that the scientists are actually right and we actually need to phase out fossil fuels ASAP.

          • Chris Schneider

            The Snowy mountains project is one great example of this. The other is his move away from the coal rhetoric. As I have said it takes time but the Centre right part of the party are moving. To be honest these are the only things the Government needs to be involved in now anyway. Everything else is being picked up by investors. The Snowy can’t.

            The great news is no matter what the government does they can’t stop the roll of Solar and wind. It’s too cheap now. I think we will be 50/50 by some time around 2020 so that would be huge! Today we spent MOST of the daylight producing MORE power via renewable in Australia than ALL of Queensland’s coal plants combined, that should be shouted from the roof tops. Imagine when Queensland gets grid scale Solar and winds farms this year!

        • Barri Mundee

          Errr, he had a golden opportunity to put his stamp on policy but squibbed it. The Coalition was facing near certain defeat if it stayed with Abbott. In contrast Turnbull was much more acceptable to the electorate and he knew this so he was in a strong position to set the agenda. He could have told the hard liners: my way or you can stick with Abbott and be thrown out on your ear. Which will it be?

        • Brian Tehan

          A lot of water has passed under the bridge in the many years that have passed since Malcolm was rolled. Since then, the price of renewables has plummeted and the public has embraced them. The threat of climate change has become more obvious after the series of increasingly warm years and increasing extreme weather.
          Turnbull mostly acts the part of a climate denier with the odd token action such as the study on expanding the Snowy Scheme to include more pumped hydro.

          • Chris Schneider

            While ever he doesn’t disrupt the industry it’s on it’s way now anyway. But Malcolm is leading a party that had tied itself to coal. It takes a bit to turn that policy. His heart is in it but it really sucks when people stab him in the back for moving the party in thew right direction. I can understand the right winger having a cry about hi turning his back on coal but the left needs to find encouragement in his approach. This will create political momentum and encourage more of his party to follow him.

          • Pedro

            I do have to take my hat of to Malcolm for wedging his own party on the Snowy Hydro pumped storage project because who in his own party is going to talk down the “iconic snowy project”. I suspect that in reality it is a 5-10 year project that will cost significantly more than initial cost estimates. Then you have Elon Musk saying Tesla can have 100MWh of battery storage installed in 100 days (very doubtful of this claim). I can think of 3 Australian companies that could do it in 6-12 months probably for half the price of Tesla.

          • Chris Schneider

            Then it’s a bet SA should take then as Elon said it’s free if he can’t make the time

          • Pedro

            If I was the SA premier I would have made a captains call and said you are on to Elon. The gear alone would have been 6 weeks on the water.

    • Darren

      Virtual Power Plants via residential solar+storage will dwarf hydro, and be rolled out far quicker.

      Even germany now realises this.
      http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tennet-hldg-power-blockchain-idUSKBN17X2GY?il=0

      TenneT and Sonnen’s e-Services subsidiary aim to sign up 6,000 household PV producers equipped with storage batteries by the end of May.

      The project will be supported by blockchain technology from IBM, which works as an inexpensive transaction-processing system for tracking and recording encrypted information.

      It holds potential to link up small energy “prosumers” and make them independent of centralized power providers.

      “A home storage unit for solar power on its own is less valuable than one that can be used collectively,” said Philipp Schroeder, director of sales and marketing at Bavaria-based Sonnen.

      “We will be able to create a big virtual power line. That is revolutionary.”

      *snip*

      Should 10 percent of all households use solar plus storage in 10 years, that would create capacity of some 6 gigawatts of power, he said, equivalent to six nuclear plants.

      And we already have 6GW (granted its not storage or vpp yet) in aus, to double to 12GW by 2020… Snowy wont even be upgraded by then, if it passes all feasibility studies…

      • Chris Schneider

        Darren, I totally agree that Virtual power plants will be a critical part of the solution, but to discount one idea because they other guy came up with it is simply stupid. You don’t have a crystal ball, anything could happen in the next 5 years. Why discount one technology and pick a winner now? The states are already getting involved in Battery storage (in my opinion in the wrong way as I believe “prosumers” with Virtual power plants will be a better spend) but I could be wrong. And the new network will be all about resilience. Even this site was talking about Hydro until Malcolm brought it up.

        Here is a better article to link to as it’s based in Australia and is already happening! http://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-largest-virtual-power-plant-operation-help-reposit-20627/

        • Darren

          Im already aware its happening here. My point was Germany is now following, and are rolling out 6000 batteries in the space of a month. That speed is insane.

          • Chris Schneider

            That’s a great start but only a fraction of the needed supply in Germany. This is one of many technologies that will be part of our network in the next ten years. Don’t look for a silver bullet. They don’t exist. Lithium on it’s own can’t solve this. New chemistry and different processes will be needed to solve the problem.

          • Darren

            Never said it could. Many options still being presented, and the race for hydrogen is just heating up.

    • Douglas Hynd

      Putting words in capitals, does not add any substance to the argument. Disagree with your reading of Turnbull – he has continued to give aid and comfort to those who have fought against developing a coherent stable climate and energy policy framework

      • Chris Schneider

        It takes a LONG time top turn a ship around. He tried reffing on the wheel a few years back and found dead water remember no one supported him. This time he is taking a measured approach which seems to be working, he is bringing everyone with him this time. He is being a diplomat NOT a dictator. The capitals are to emphasise the word, pretty normal practise given you can’t do that in any other way in written words.

        • Chris – I’ve been on off grid renewables for 30 years. On an income that the liberal party couldn’t cook a meal with and now that panels have come down so far, there is no excuse except short-sighted, terminal stupidity. The time for a slow, measured transition where everybody’s ego is massaged as a first priority is long over – it was over in 1980. Now all we can achieve is some harm minimisation. The damage is done, but to those living in crowded suburbs, in energy sink housing, that is not yet obvious, because the connection to a living environment is missing. When it becomes obvious, I hope to be dead – I am 68. But I feel so sorry for the next two generations.

          • Chris Schneider

            That’s a very depressing opinion. We need to move there and the great thing is now that solar panels (unlike in the 80s) are the cheapest form of power Government has no way of stopping it. We are and will transition it’s a big network and will take time and careful planning though. Something some people are missing.

          • Coley

            Chris, look back on this site to when Turnbull managed to grab his job back, there was a lot of approval and hope that we would see positive moves from Turnbull, alas it proved to be a false hope.

          • Chris Schneider

            Now you remember back to then. He won by a few votes. To do so he had to agree to a few right leaning things he didn’t want to like the plan on Gay marriage (he is one of the biggest advocates for their rights) Renewables was another. He is the leader of a party not it’s dictator. There is a massive difference. The reason he lost the leadership before was that exact reason. The “scandal” was just an excuse.

          • john

            Kay believe me lots of people get it ok.
            I have seen a change in peoples opinion and they now get it for instance one said ” I will never put panels on my house ” has and now is happy to see the results.
            Yes i know he thinks the sun shines out of the Donald however he is waking up slowly.

          • stephan011

            “On an income that the liberal party couldn’t cook a meal with” great writing!

        • Barri Mundee

          I will judge him by what he does and what he achieves, not by what he says.

          • Chris Schneider

            As you should. This announcement though is encouraging

    • Craig Allen

      So you’re arguing that the reason that right wingers have crap, destructive beliefs and policies is that people keep pointing this out, and that if the we would just shut up or praise them instead then they would stop being so destructive and be less right wing. Um… suuuure.

      • Chris Schneider

        LOL. No, why do people always need to take things to the extreme? Right winger are just as irrelevant as left wingers. Neither will EVER listen to reason. It’s the job of a centre to do actual work. Shitting on a idea that you WERE inline with a week prior simply because the other party came up with an idea to ACTUALLY implement is what I’m pointing out.

        • stephan011

          Yeah, this false equivalency thing you got going here is bullshit. The Left has been reality-based throughout the Right’s ascendency.

          • Chris Schneider

            No, the left has wanted solar panels everywhere long before they were able to produce more power than they consumed. Both Left and Right are stuck in a endless loop of self affirmation. Sorry you can’t see out of your loop.

          • stephan011

            Just because you don’t understand the strategy doesn’t mean there wasn’t one.

          • Chris Schneider

            What in gods name does that stupid comment mean?

          • stephan011

            It means that there was good reasons for pushing un-economic technologies. Solar and wind are technologies, and like all technologies they get better and cheaper over time, and importantly, that improvement is predictable and you can rely on it. Cheap solar was never a question, it was simply a matter of investing enough to drive that process forward. The people pushing for these investments understand that.

            The learning rate for solar is currently about 21%, meaning every doubling in volume yields a ~20% decrease in cost. That curve will flatten over time, but we are not anywhere near a leveling off, and therefore you can *expect* solar to keep falling in cost.

            https://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/26/21-solar-pv-learning-curve-to-continue-report-projects/

          • Chris Schneider

            The laws of scale are definitely important but understanding that Australia is nothing in the grand scheme of things. with out the world moving the scale isn’t there. It’s the same as carbon pricing. While it’s the most efficient way encourage a move from Coal with out it being a world wide thing all that happens is the manufacturing just shifts country.

            I totally get what you are saying but the biggest change that has happened in the last few years is China getting on board. To give you an idea last year China installed more Solar power than we consume. 33GW we would need 27GW (I know that doesn’t translate to that amount) This is just an example of how unimportant we are to not only the climate but the scale proposition. We are now at a turning point where there is no reason not to install solar and wind every where but to think we had influence on scale is a total lack of the understanding of the scale currently being produced. There is now over 300GWs of solar! 1/10 would be too much of just solar as there needs to be a balance with other renewables for better grid security.

            Whether you believe my thoughts on scale really is irrelevant. The world has now found scale. Politics are no longer relevant. The market will take it from here. The only thing government needs to look at it energy security. Snowy 2.0 will address this at a national level.

          • stephan011

            Australia might not have the scale on solar at this stage of development, but Australia is leading the world in battery applications. For all of these technologies, it’s been a joint effort, many players have paid heavily to move the market forward, and, Australia’s contribution isn’t small. China jumped in solar in part because Germany spent billions on expensive solar and created a huge (for the time) market.

            And the reason commercial solar even existed, was because of California’s investments in the 1970’s under Jerry Brown when solar was first commercialized.

            Today, Australia is leading the world in grid-scale batteries and home-battery installations and the resulting ‘virtual plants’ – the whole world will learn from this, and the volume will add to that learning curve and will drive the market forward for the rest of us. In a few years time, these will be expensive, overpriced projects, but today they’re absolutely what we need.

            Today Europe is paying a steep price for offshore wind but the most recent bids are 6 cents and now market-rate (unsubsidized in other words). The US is just about to jump into offshore wind, as is China and Taiwan. Japan will come in soon after.

            Scotland and France are funding floating offshore which California needs and their experience will benefit us greatly once we launch our offshore industry.

          • Steven Gannon

            I’m sure I’ve read expert opinion that says Australia doesn’t need offshore wind.

          • stephan011

            Possibly, you have a lot of open land, and it currently costs more. But you never know, it wouldn’t surprise me if we can’t get the price of floating offshore down through serial production, if that’s the case then someone will build a factory that pops towers out all day long and you’ll just tow them to wherever they’re needed and run a wire to them.

            And offshore is certainly a big deal for the US, Japan, China and Taiwan

          • Chris Schneider

            If you actually look at storage the is an underlying difference. Australia is everyone’s test bed. It’s cheaper to transition Australia to fully renewable to prove it can be done to the rest of the world. This means companies around the world are investing here to prove it works on a grid scale. Because our scale is so small Australia is a proof of concept. Nothing really to do with the government on that. Companies are seeing the future of the grid and realising Australia is the perfect place to run the experiments. We will though benefit. With solar people already knew their capability but need the scale of China or the US. Once they jumped in solar plummeted. Germany was integral in starting this but again they had 40GWs of installed solar by 2015! That would be our entire supply!

    • riley222

      Chris if Turnbull can get Snowy 2 up and running before the next election then future generations would be rightfully grateful. The headwinds against it from within his own party are formidable, making it a big reach politically.
      We haven’t heard too much positive from Labor re Snowy 2 , would be nice if they’d commit to it if the feasibility study concludes its in the nation’s best interests.

      • Chris Schneider

        If the Greens and Labor were actually trying to solve the problem they would be publicly supporting this. This project could be done very quickly with nonpartisan support! Instead, just like gay marriage Labor wants to play politics. I would say a project like this could start next year and be finished the next if there was nonpartisan support!

        • john

          It will take 5 years at best.
          No way can it be built in 2 years.

          • The answer to fast development in rural areas is micro-grids, and that is also the most efficient system. I have never had a power outage in the worst local weather where I live, no-one has had to come from 100km away and repair the power supply, there are no power lines to be maintained at huge cost, there are no new poles required (they are now going in at much greater cost than putting all the farms and outer towns / dwellings on battery and panels, wind, mini hydro etc.). Most of the infrastructure is already partly there (farm dams, etc.) – the only obstacle to the solution is corruption, fear, greed and monumental ignorance cultivated by spin doctors, marketers and politicians. Politics is a social disease, economics is superstition masquerading as science. Good forward planning for a well integrated system is not possible in our political structure. There is no time for the monumental stupidity and blind conservatism, and the ugly selfishness of everyone involved. This is the only challenge of our time, together with a huge reduction of energy conversion ! See my main mode of transport: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8b77bb447c0b452dfa711924eb018da55f1442ac82d62b05409ba3b0a67b92fa.jpg

        • Barri Mundee

          On gay marriage Labor did not want to agree to the plebiscite (the cynical approach which was designed, Howard style, to scuttle the issue). The parliament changed the Marriage Act and it can undo it the same way.

          Who was playing politics again? hint: not Labor.

        • Ian

          Bipartisan support is the catch phrase you are looking for.

    • Thucydides

      I don’t think you can have been reading this site for very long, Chris, or you would know that there has been plenty of perfectly straight up and down reporting and analysis here on the issue of renewable energy over the years – in addition to the occasional comment piece such as this. And really, compared to some of the absurd tripe dished out by the fossil fuel lobby (see above) the comment on this site is a model of politeness and restraint. People like Bolt, Dean and Barnaby Joyce are not fair, open-minded people who will see reason when presented with undeniable facts. They are shrewd and cynical polemicists making a living by grinding political axes for vested interests. Undeniable facts are just an opportunity to create alternative facts like “genocidal bird holocaust machines”. Any journalist who is too timid to call this out is not doing their job.

      I would tend to agree with you that it’s better for someone writing to persuade and convince to be wary of using value-laden slogans and shorthand terms such as “conservatives” – as in the opening sentence of this article. Antonyms like conservative/progressive or left/right is a convenient but lazy shorthand. It pushes emotional buttons, but generates different meanings depending on where each reader is coming from. Noone’s political leanings can be summed up by putting them on a one dimensional scale of “left” to “right”. Indeed there are many people who have “conservative” sympathies who believe in climate action.

      The following article is about a bunch of traditional conservatives who believe in conserving a livable climate: https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/1/15503648/conservative-climate-change-tv-ads-trump

      • Chris Schneider

        I would identify as a Central leftist but was a conservative (just for reference) There is stupid irrational comments from both side of the argument. The far left point at every weather event and say “see Climate change”. As I sad the Centre of both sides are the only people you can change. This is a job Malcolm Turnbul IS doing. He has turned the ship a long way! not long now!

        • Steven Gannon

          I tend to agree with your posts Chris, fingers crossed.

    • John Saint-Smith

      I agree with one of your points:
      “NO one listens to a smart (actually dumb) ass”

  • chrgordon27

    Q: “How do we speak to National MPs in their language … ?” A: Get the farmers who are currently hosting wind farms, and earning a very useful fee for doing so, to get in Barnaby’s face and tell him how useful they are for their farm businesses.

    • Andrew Bray

      They already are. So far it’s water off a duck’s back. One day….

    • wholisticguy

      I’ve spoken directly to Barnaby Joyce at a National party breakfast after being introduced by a sitting national MP on the significant role (backed by first hand experience) that decentralised renewables (rooftop solar) has had on regional development, good jobs and energy cost control for rural businesses.

      He was happy to shake my hand and then turn around a few days later and talk about how renewables are driving up the cost of electricity. Without mention of how this industry can prevent massive leakage of cash out of rural areas on energy bills.

      The renewables industry/lobby has some work to do to displace the entrenched players politically. Shouldn’t be dragging on like this, it already has massive popular support.

      • stephan011

        The exact opposite has happened in the US wind is driving down the cost of energy in Texas and the Midwest

    • Steven Gannon

      The powerful National Farmers Federation now publically embraces renewables. Most farmers under fifty are pretty switched on, they aren’t being fooled by him. I’ve met a few who have voted Greens 1, Nat’s 2.

    • stephan011

      This is for the US, but the same will hold for Australia, go out and find those stories:

      Renewable jobs are mostly rural jobs: the lease payments that farmers and ranchers earn, make a strong contribution to the bottom line for farmers, and rural counties earn tax revenues that are often a major source of income for the county.

      Renewables have become the salvation rural economies across America:

      “Solar provides another option for farmers”
      http://www.iowafarmertoday.com/news/regional/solar-provides-another-option-for-farmers/article_e94e88b4-2518-11e7-b2bf-a76db4cf20e4.html

      http://www.missourifarmertoday.com/news/regional/energy-boost-solar-provides-another-option-for-farmers/article_6d03bac6-2546-11e7-a9b6-3ba7913fb5c3.html

      “Letter: Utility-scale solar power benefits Iowa”
      http://www.iowastatedaily.com/opinion/letters/article_b43e87da-2542-11e7-9d93-37583720adc3.html

      American farmers and ranchers earned $222 million in lease payments in 2015, and that figure has gone up a lot since then. Plus local governments get a significant fraction of their tax revenues from from wind farms
      http://www.awea.org/MediaCenter/pressrelease.aspx?ItemNumber=8609

      “Colorado farmers reap $9 million in payments from turbines”
      http://www.denverpost.com/2016/03/25/colorado-farmers-reap-9-million-in-payments-from-turbines/

      “Turning to turbines: As commodity prices remain low, wind energy leases offer a welcome source of income for farmers”
      http://www.omaha.com/money/turning-to-turbines-as-commodity-prices-remain-low-wind-energy/article_2814e2cf-83a3-547d-a09e-f039e935f399.html

      • Western Mark
        • stephan011

          The ‘attack’ as NR wants to call it. Is actually the town trying to restrict the property rights of nearby landowners who want these turbines.

          Wind farms are a major source of income for rural America. Farmers make about $10k each year for each turbine, for 30 years. That’s a lot of money.

          Rural counties earn property taxes that run to the millions as well and it’s stable revenue.

          Finally, wind and solar are jobs machines, and they’re rural jobs. The fastest growing profession in the US last year was ‘Wind technician’. The wind industry employs 105k (up 15k last year) and the solar industry employs 260,000 (up 60,000 last year). Coal employs 70k. http://fortune.com/2017/02/07/us-solar-jobs-2016/

          It’s hugely ironic, but renewables are a bigger deal for rural America than the urban centers who are pushing for it.

          A couple of articles about why farmers are pro-wind:

          “Colorado farmers reap $9 million in payments from turbines”
          http://www.denverpost.com/2016/03/25/colorado-farmers-reap-9-million-in-payments-from-turbines/

          “Turning to turbines: As commodity prices remain low, wind energy leases offer a welcome source of income for farmers”
          http://www.omaha.com/money/turning-to-turbines-as-commodity-prices-remain-low-wind-energy/article_2814e2cf-83a3-547d-a09e-f039e935f399.html

          • Western Mark

            Did you actually read the article? A small town being sued because they want a 2 mile buffer between them and the IWTs, not because they don’t want any at all.
            There are very few rural jobs created other than a bit of site prep and cleanup.
            Farmers aren’t so much ‘pro-wind’ as they are pro-additional-income. Can’t blame them for that, but when a township or municipality says no then the development should not happen.

          • stephan011

            There is a legitimate question of property rights when the town wants to extend it’s influence out that far. It’s not just the wind company on the other side of this debate, it’s farmers who have now been told they can’t use their land for wind farms.

            I have no argument for reasonable zoning, but there’s a very reasonable argument that 2 miles is an abuse of that power.

            It’s not a small amount of money for farmers: typical lease payments are $10,000 per year per turbine – for 20+ years. It’s also a significant amount of money for the county: a typical wind farm pays out millions in property taxes.

          • Western Mark

            Can those farmers subdivide their properties for housing developments? Or sell a portion for a garbage dump? Doubtful. IWTs are no different. I don’t begrudge the farmers their retirement income but that is all it is. Supplied by their neighbors in the next county. Any town that wants IWTs should get them and be fully accountable for the ‘benefits’, but, any that say no or put limits in place should also have their decisions respected.
            But as you say, it is all about the money. Lease payments and property taxes are “also a significant amount of money”. Do you really think these companies are paying out that amount of money and still making billions in profit to save the planet? They are doing what they are expected and supposed to do – make money for their shareholders. Oddly, that is exactly the same goal of big, bad oil, gas and coal companies. Which also make lease and tax payments.

          • stephan011

            So I’ve read that a ‘reasonable’ sound limit, where it drops low enough that problem are rare if not completely eliminated, is 1/2 mile. Something around that seems like it would be a good balance.

            And yes, I *do* think companies will meet their contractual agreements to make lease payments. Why would you ever think they wouldn’t. We have courts. Typically 3% of the value of generated energy for the landowner and whatever the local property tax rates are.

          • Western Mark

            1/2 a mile may appear reasonable for sound you can hear but it is the sound you ‘feel’ and the daytime flicker effect that are the real problems. Why do you suppose Poland, I believe, changed their horizontal siting rules to 20x the height of the IWT? The adverse effects on people may seem rare but I suspect that is simply a case of current siting – rural countryside. Put a string of IWTs around a suburban neighborhood and I’m sure the number of adverse effect complaints will put the project on hold before it is complete.
            The effects of IWTs on humans has only just started to be studied. The successful litigation against a wind company in Ireland has helped move analytics past the all too common “it’s all in your head” diagnoses.

          • stephan011

            Poland changed it’s siting rules because they are pro-coal and wanted to kill the wind industry. Full stop.

          • stephan011

            Poland’s hard-right government is pro-coal and anti-wind, the intended goal of this regulation is to kill wind, full stop.

  • lin

    Blot et. al. are bleating on about wind turbine “genocide” of around 2000 birds in Australia? Victorian duck hunters kill more than 100 times as many as this in a season, including a fair number of protected and endangered species. Windows, cars and power lines kill thousands of times more birds than wind turbines, yet they are silent on those forms of “genocide”. Real “big picture” stuff. It really shows them up for the captured ideological fools they are.

    • Colin Nicholson

      Just quote him on reasons why the duck season should be limited to 2000 birds australia wide per year. I’m joining the anti duck hunting organisations

    • Wally

      Yes, Barnaby’s lack of real world perspective is astonishing – power lines kill thousands of possums, foresters and farmers are licensed to poison tens of thousands of native animals, a million roos are to be culled this year etc etc – and lets not forget coal mines actually kill humans!

  • Miles Harding

    The first dog on the moon said today:
    “Horror and disgust is a normal and healthy resoponse to the degraded circus that serves as our democracy. If you aren’t outraged by the shameless liars and thugs slithering unaccountably to the top then you’re either one of them or dead.”
    This seems to about sum up today’s LNP politics.

    Stubborn and stupid resistance to change has a long history in the human race and it doesn’t seem to matter if the result is beneficial for society and creates opportunities, loud voices will oppose it.

    The problem, as I see it, is that the change we are talking about will fundamentally rewrite the rules of business and society. It doesn’t seem to matter where one looks, virtually every aspect of human activity is unsustainable and showing unmistakable signs of encountering the ‘limits to growth’.

    When considering this ‘inconvenient truth’, we can either accept it and get on with navigating the coming new environment, or resist it, inventing lies to justify the increasingly untenable position of continued buisness as usual.

    The wind turbine diversion is one of the last ditch attempts to save the status quo and continue down the dead-end path we currently call ‘progress’.

    It is said that we compensate for a deficit in one sense by developing others. For example, blind people have been known to develop the capacity to echo-locate in the same manner as a dolphin. It is also said that this explains why stupid people often compensate by developing big mouths.

    • Jim Wiegand

      The image at this link lets all readers know
      exactly who the liars are with wind energy. The wind industry and government are hiding well over 90% of mortality from turbines. This research fraud takes place in Australia, the UK and the US. I know because I have analyzed the fraudulent studies and have written about some of them. https://www.facebook.com/ph

  • Rob G

    Rowan Dean IS the argument against being right wing. A session with him will make anyone run to the progressive side. He might make a good One Nation pollie, he has all the crazy credentials Hanson seeks… Alternatively the Greens and ALP should encourage him to do a road trip…. What an asset he could be. “The why you (don’t) want to go right tour”

  • stephan011

    Something I drop into discussions any time this right-wing talking point comes up:

    Yes, windmills kill birds, but you’ve been misled about how serious the problem is, wherever you’ve been getting your info from, they are trying to manipulate you. Here are some things that kill more birds:

    Cats – 400 million
    Buildings – 303 million
    Cars – 200 million
    Poison – 72 million
    Electrical line collisions – 25 million
    Communication tower collisions 6.5 million
    Electrical line electrocution – 5.4 million
    Oil Pits – 750,000
    Windmills – 174,000

    US Fish and Wildlife: “Threats to Birds: Migratory Birds Mortality“
    https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds.php

    • Steven Gannon

      Birds kill birds too, now that’s genocide.

    • Western Mark

      All that says is death by IWT will increase. The other numbers are essentially static.

      • stephan011

        Not necessarily, we’ve learned a lot about how to mitigate problems. The early wind farms were unknowingly placed near migratory routes and the windmills were much smaller and there were a lot more of them.

        These two things alone have dramatically reduced bird kills. There is also active research into other methods including stopping windmills when eagles come near, etc.

    • Jim Wiegand

      Quoting fraudulent studies does not change the fact that these turbines are incredible killers of rare and endangered species. Nor does it make you an expert. It makes you a fool.

      This industry has been rigging all their assessments,population surveys and impacts to species for decades. The scientific fraud associated with wind energy is an international problem associated.
      While fraud like you have posted is being printed in the media your eagle and raptor populations are being slaughtered off by wind turbines. You can get some of the
      Some of the hidden truth about wind energy along with actual scientific facts exposing this industry’s fraudulent research can be found by looking up these posts…………

      COMMENTS ON “ICEBREAKER” PROJECT TITLE EA-2045

      These comments are against a seed project for future wind
      turbine developments on the Great lakes. Turbines in the great lake region will easily kill hundreds of bald eagles annually. In Washington DC our corrupt The Interior Department (USFWS etc.) laid the ground work for these turbines by passing a new rule in Dec 2016 that will allow industry to slaughter up to 7518 bald eagles annually or 20 a day. For these new eagle killing rules, some of the fraudulent research was submitted by the Interior Department is discussed in these comments. More of this bogus research is also discussed in the 3 part “Harvesting Eagles” articles .

      Also look up and read…… “Slaughtering Endangered
      Species with “Clean” and “Green” Energy

      COMMENTS Against the Proposed Increase of Incidental Take
      for Maui’s Nene and Hoary Bats

      After hiding most of their wind turbine slaughter to endangered species with fake industry research, a fraudulent wind industry in Hawaii is now asking for permission to kill far more of these endangered species. These comments expose many of the wind energy lies, and tricks used since 2007 when supposedly looking for endangered species carcasses around Hawaii’s turbines.

      • stephan011

        That ‘fraudulent’ study was conducted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. When the facts don’t agree with you, you attack the source. It’s dishonest and it’s a weakness.

        • Jim Wiegand

          This Agency is run by hand picked liars. Lower level employees know this, but can’t say a word because of repercussions. I know this because I am in communication with some of them. I attack these liars because our raptor populations are being wiped out and as an expert I cannot be fooled with their garbage studies.

          • stephan011

            Well it’s ironic then, that your “35,000 eagles kill” claim is a misrepresentation of FWS data.

            You’re just dishonest.

          • Jim Wiegand

            People that do not know, what they do not know should keep their mouth shut. You are one of these people………..Here are some hidden facts about the wind industry’s massive ongoing slaughter to eagles. I have a copy of this publication showing this 1997 quote. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1392930507420484&set=p.1392930507420484&type=3&theater

          • stephan011

            The 35,000 eagle killed claim is a misrepresentation of FWS data. It says it right here in black and white in the editorial where you got that number from:

            “more than 35,000 eagles have been shipped to the National Eagle Repository near Denver” https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/letters/wind-powers-dirty-little-secret-dead-eagles/

            That’s ALL eagles for ALL causes, not wind as you falsely claimed.

            Your claims are dishonest.

          • Jim Wiegand

            You are dishonest one and you have not a bit of wildlife expertise. I can tell by you comments. I do know exactly what the site says. I also know what it does not say. The Interior Department will never say a word about the origin of any of these these 35,000 carcasses. The reason is because most of these carcasses are form wind energy. My estimate is that 50-70% are from wind energy. There are also several hundred eagles that were GPS fitted and the mortality data associated with these eagles is data will not be released for the same reasons.

            From the data I was able to collect going back to 1997 I was able to prove that the numbers of eagle carcasses being received by the repository were increasing dramatically from areas of wind energy development. It was also clear from the declining golden eagle carcasses coming in from CA, that this population was being decimated. After
            exposing this fraud a few years ago in several articles, the USFWS did what they always do, they stopped releasing even the smallest bits of information about this eagle carcass recycling facility.

          • stephan011

            Jim, you run an antiques shop in Redding, Ca. and have never held a job as a biologist and have no peer-reviewed published work. Don’t pretend you’re a wildlife expert, you are not.

            You are a conspiracy theorist.

          • Jim Wiegand

            Had your number from the beginning. Actually I am one of the top experts on eagles in the world. I am also the top experts in the world on the wind industry’s FAKE research. If I had a shop I would not be able to get out in the field on a regular basis like I’ve been doing for 50 years. A place which I am sure you never go. This is what imposters do. two days ago I watched a bald eagle catch and consume a duck while you were posting your lies under a fake name. The image at this link lets all readers know exactly who the liars are. The wind industry and government. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1392930507420484&set=p.1392930507420484&type=3&theater

          • stephan011

            ok “top expert” how about you post links to your peer-reviewed research then.

            Put up or shut up.

            Or maybe go you should spend time with your antiques business: http://www.jimwiegand.com

          • Jim Wiegand

            I will put up, but you will never shut up because of your poor character. You know I am not in or that I want very little to do with the corrupt “peer review” club that you hold in such high esteem. I will however show readers with absolute facts why these peer reviewed studies that relate to the wind industry and their so called expert opinions are complete garbage.

            Maybe we should start with the silly Blue Ribbon panel of self important fakes, that put together the ridiculous and massive Condor report. While the wind industry continued to destroy their historical mountain habitat. Every one of these fake experts with credentials said virtually nothing about how bad these turbines were and what was really happening out in the field.

          • Jim Wiegand

            I am a top expert with integrity. For fraudulent reviewed research maybe we should start with the silly Blue Ribbon panel of self important fakes, that put together the ridiculous and massive Condor report. While the wind industry continued to destroy their historical mountain habitat. Every one of these fake experts with credentials said virtually nothing about how bad these turbines were and what was really happening out in the field,

            Also as top expert I instrumental in stopping a wind project in CA by exposing fraudulent research conducted by one of the industry’s premier fake experts that has produced many peer reviewed studies. I was told, everyone in attendance at the hearing, could see this weasel squirm when presented with “MY QUESTIONS” about his lousy research. I also help to stop another seed project in CA’s North Coast by educating the community what was going to happen to their wildlife and by showing them the true character of this industry’s research.

          • stephan011

            So you don’t work in the field professionally and have no peer reviewed work. But you have the chutzpah to describe yourself as a ‘top expert’. Just wow.

          • Jim Wiegand

            Also as top expert I was instrumental in stopping a wind project in CA by exposing fraudulent research conducted by one of the industry’s premier fake experts that has produced many peer reviewed studies. I was told, everyone in attendance at the hearing, could see this weasel squirm when presented with “MY QUESTIONS” about his lousy research. I also help to stop another seed project in CA’s North Coast by educating the community what was going to happen to their wildlife and by showing them the true character of this industry’s research.

      • jamcl3

        Are you saying the US Fish and Wildlife service is fraudulent?

        • Jim Wiegand

          This Agency is run by hand picked liars. Lower level employees that see all this happening, can’t say a word because of repercussions. I know this because I am in communication with some of them. I attack these liars because our raptor populations are being wiped out and as an expert I cannot be fooled with their garbage studies. If you read the two posts above you will easily see and understand the fraud that passes for science these days.

    • jamcl3

      Thanks, nice source… I wonder how long before the new administration takes it down?

      • Jim Wiegand

        It should have been taken down years ago because all these numbers came from completely bogus research designed to deflect from the wind industry’s slaughter to highly protected and endangered species.

  • phred01

    Comrade Trump is going to give away 7 billlion for clean coal project. It’s a sop to the coal industry to have their proverbial snouts in the trough. However,
    “Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg was blunt about the prospects for so-called “clean coal.”

    “Carbon capture is total bullshit,”

  • Cooma Doug

    The article by Sam concerning the petrol car extinction in India by 2030 is surely a nail in the coffin for coal.
    There are countless links between that policy and the demand for all fossil fuels.

    • stephan011

      China will go this way soon as well. It’s already happening in the cities via permit restrictions and they have zero reason to support the gasmobile industry when their oil reserves are minimal.

  • DavidSG
    • mick

      thx mate it just went to nick xenophon

  • John Saint-Smith

    “A moral responsibility to keep lights on for poor Indians”(by selling them expensive Australian coal at a huge profit!) “China is doing nothing about CO2 emissions”, “The carbon tax will result in $100 lamb roasts”, “Wind turbines are ugly and cause black-outs”(except when they’re creating jobs in his electorate).

    Barmy Choice has an unequalled ability to get on the wrong side of any argument he engages in.

  • derekbolton

    I don’t know if Mr Goyal is pixyish, perhaps he is, but his first name is Piyush.

  • Roger Franklin

    Would someone like to buy both sides of the house the book “Who Moved my Cheese” – as they are both turning into Hem and Haw. Just waiting to see who chisels a note on who’s door “If you do not change, you will become Extinct”

    Most likely no-one as both sides of the house are financed (and this influenced / told) by large corporate’s what to say and do.

    This said – it seems that a lot of people are putting in Solar and Batteries and either significantly reducing their grid power demand, or pulling the plug on the grid and going it alone.

    Also a shame that the Govt is not supporting any of the local solar and battery companies – these are the energy companies of the future and they are not asking the govt for a railway line to be built to what will become a large hole in the ground. But we have a long history of not supporting our innovators and watching them move their companies off-shore and watching them succeed.
    Barnaby – our biggest export could be products, designed and built here by innovative and creative people employing locals – not Coal! We have a huge pool of talent in the wider community – encourage and provide funding to them – not to Coal.

    Barnaby – Maybe someone is chiseling a note on your door “If you do not change, you will become Extinct”

  • Jim Wiegand

    An interesting story ran in America recently. It may be a turning point where the people start doing something about rampant green energy fraud taking place. The title of this story is “Developer pulls plug on proposed wind farm near Searchlight” but it should have probably read ………………”Industry and Government fraud exposed in wind farm attempt.” because this is what really took place.
    In this situation true conservationists with some financial backing, finally took the federal Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to court, arguing the agencies hadn’t adequately analyzed the impacts to federally protected species.

    This happens to be the truth, not only for this location but at every wind farm location in America because this industry has been rigging and creating fraudulent research since 1985. I can prove it a hundred times over.
    But there is much more to all this because the Bureau of Land Management and
    the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are in collusion with this industry and the
    production of all this fraudulent impact research. I can also prove this a
    hundred times over.

    Eagle populations are being slaughtered off across the world. Since 1997 the numbers of eagle carcasses from wind energy has grown every year and as of 2016 over 35,000 eagles have been shipped to the Denver Eagle Repository. In 1997 when America had just 1/35 of the installed wind energy we have today, wind energy was already listed as one of the primary sources of the Repository’s eagle carcasses. I have this in writing. Thanks to the Clinton Administration, nothing since has been disclosed about wind energy, dead eagles and the Denver Eagle Repository.

    Stories about all the wind industry jobs being created are also complete farce because most of the money is funneled off to industry kingpins. In addition once you really scrutinize all the embellished green energy data it also becomes apparent these horrific turbines provide little energy at a phenomenal cost to taxpayers. In America turbines provide about 1/300 of this nation’s total energy, even using their embellished figures.

    With wind energy only a fraction of wind energy production ever gets delivered to end
    users. Wind energy production without backup energy, is like buying a 50lb
    block of ice from an ice company, but the delivery truck has no refrigeration
    and most of it has melted by the time you receive it. Yet tax credits are given
    as if none of these losses are taking place.

    Sadly people have been led to believe that these inefficient turbines are going to be the backbone energy supply for a future of electrical transportation and
    electronic gadgets. It is not possible. As it is, almost all of the electricity used
    today to recharge every battery in America, happens to come from other energy
    sources. It will always be that way.

    Of course the scumbags and all the shadow companies selling turbines, have known
    all this for years.

    • stephan011

      You know, the problem with getting all your news from right-wing sources like the opinion pages of the Las Vegas Review Journal, is that they routinely *lie* about things. Here’s the article where it appears you got your “35,000 eagles have been shipped to the Denver Eagle Repository.” talking point:

      https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/letters/wind-powers-dirty-little-secret-dead-eagles/

      And here’s the reality:
      https://www.fws.gov/eaglerepository/statistics.php

      These are eagle kills from ALL sources, NOT from wind as you falsely imply.

      • Jim Wiegand

        No matter what I say about this fraud of an industry you will say the opposite because this is in your character. For everyone else
        read about how the wind industry has been
        hiding over 90 percent of their turbine slaughter since 1985. Here are a
        number of articles I have written that clearly discuss the wind
        industry’s hidden slaughter and lack of science:
        Slaughtering Endangered Species with “Clean” and “Green”
        Energy
        COMMENTS Against the Proposed Increase of
        Incidental Take for Maui’s Nene and Hoary Bats

        https://medium.com/…/slaughtering-endangered-species…
        The highest annual estimated
        bird mortality from wind turbines in the US is claimed to be no more
        than 573,000. This article analyzes the manipulation of a study
        conducted at a University around one large turbine. Read how this
        unscientific study relates to the fake US wind mortality estimate.

        Has
        annual wind turbine mortality to birds and bats reached 45 million? Yes,
        according to one study. http://www.windtaskforce.org/…/has-annual-wind-turbine…
        This
        is a recent comprehensive summery of the fake wind industry research
        being used to push wind projects onto an ignorant public. Hundreds of
        700 ft turbines are planned for Lake Erie.

        LAKE ERIE COMMENTS ON
        “ICEBREAKER” PROJECT TITLE EA-2045
        https://medium.com/…/comments-on-icebreaker-6bb3bad6ff66

        A three-part article “Harvesting Eagles” that
        discusses the wind industry’s /FWS rigged research and the corrupt
        history behind the latest proposal to kill 6200 eagles annually.
        https://www.masterresource.org/cuisi…/harvesting-eagles-1/
        https://www.masterresource.org/cuis…/harvesting-eagles-ii/

        https://www.masterresource.org/cui…/harvesting-eagles-iii/

        These two articles expose Audubon and their two-faced role
        in the development of wind energy https://www.masterresource.org/…/avoiding-science-and…/
        https://www.masterresource.org/…/money-dead-eagles…/
        This
        article discusses the 31,000 (2015 numbers) unaccounted for eagle
        carcasses that have been sent to the Denver Repository since 1997. In
        this 3 part article even former FWS agents speak out………. “Voice of
        Dead eagles”
        https://www.masterresource.org/cui…/voice-dead-eagles-iii/
        https://www.masterresource.org/…/windpower-slaughter…/
        https://www.masterresource.org/…/usfws-special-agents…/
        Additional
        hidden eagle carcass information and dismal wind energy production
        numbers are available for congress in this 2 part article “Clean Energy
        Producers Act of 2015 (H.R. 493): Eagle Slaughter Amnesty for Industrial
        Wind”.
        https://www.masterresource.org/…/clean-energy…/
        Here
        is an excellent article that describes some of the hidden tricks being
        used to rig wind industry mortality data.

        “Exposing
        the wind industry genocide” – The ECOReport
        http://theecoreport.com/exposing-the-wind-industry-genocide/
        An
        additional article that describes some of the various methods being
        used to rigwind industry mortality data. Big Wind & Avian Mortality
        (Part I & Part 2)
        http://www.masterresource.org/2013/03/avian-mortality-wind-i
        http://www.masterresource.org/…/wind-avian-mortality-ii/
        This Article exposes a hidden and rapidly declining golden eagle population “EAGLE EXPERT WARNS OF POPULATION COLLAPSE”
        http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/12544
        An early article that discusses some of the history behind the industry rigged
        research. “THE 28 YEAR WIND INDUSTRY COVER-UP” Parts 1&2
        http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/9011
        http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/9174
        An
        article that discusses wimpy lawsuits that get lots of media attention
        but let this industry off the hook. “Bald and Golden Eagles Victorious:
        Court Invalidates 30-Year “Eagle Take” Rule” (feds vs. federal law)
        https://www.masterresource.org/…/bald-golden-eagles…/
        Readers
        will also be further enlightened about the industry’s rigged research
        if they view the YouTube video “Cheeseburgers and the wind industry”.

  • Jim Wiegand

    With wind energy only a fraction of wind energy production ever gets delivered to end
    users. Wind energy production without backup energy, is like buying a 50lb
    block of ice from an ice company, but the delivery truck has no refrigeration
    and most of it has melted by the time you receive it. Yet this industry pretends none of these losses are taking place and lies about true wind energy production are everywhere.

    Sadly people have been led to believe that these inefficient turbines are going to be the backbone energy supply for a future of electrical transportation and electronic gadgets. It is not possible. As it is, almost all of the electricity used today to recharge every battery in America, happens to come from other energy sources. It will always be that way.

    Of course the scumbags and all the shadow companies selling these inefficient turbines, have known all this for years.

    • stephan011

      You have no idea of how the grid works.

      Intermittency isn’t the problem you’ve been told it is, and solar produces power when it’s needed the most. The reason it’s not a big deal is that *demand* has always been intermittent. It’s the grid operator’s job to add/remove generation to balance supply with demand. This is how the grid has always worked, solar and wind are just more of the same.

      And the grid has always been redundant too, even nuke plants have backup. The grid has lots of redundant power sources that switch on/off as needed, renewables are just another source, and integrating large amounts of renewables isn’t difficult.

      You don’t have to take my word for it, listen to what utility Execs have say: “Why utilities are more confident than ever about renewable energy growth”

      http://www.utilitydive.com/news/why-utilities-are-more-confident-than-ever-about-renewable-energy-growth/440492/

      • Jim Wiegand

        This is a fact………….Load losses and transmission losses wipe out a great seal of wind energy production before it get to end users.

  • Jim Wiegand

    Here are some hidden facts about the wind industry’s massive ongoing slaughter to eagles. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1392930507420484&set=p.1392930507420484&type=3&theater

  • Jim Wiegand

    For the honest people living in Australia………..Wind industry and government LIES are real.

    Outside of the US, the truth about wind energy’s horrific impacts on species annihilation is much more hidden. Other countries do not have a system to recycle eagle parts to Native Americans like that in America. Without this system, the public in the UK and other countries have absolutely no idea of the eagles being killed by wind energy. God knows they certainly will not tell you. Fortunately in America we have such a system and this has allowed me to expose the magnitude of this mind-numbing industrial slaughter along with the government collusion taking place regarding wind energy.

    From the data I was able to collect going back to 1997 I was able to prove that the numbers of eagle carcasses being received by the repository were increasing dramatically from areas of wind energy development. It was also clear from the declining golden eagle carcasses coming in from CA, that this population was being decimated. After exposing this fraud a few years ago in several articles, the USFWS did what they always do, they stopped releasing even the smallest bits of information about this eagle carcass recycling facility.

    The data from 2013 was posted before my articles were published. The data from 2014 is incomplete and the individual body counts for bald eagles and golden eagles is missing. https://www.fws.gov/eaglerepository/statistics.php

    If you click on this site it claims…… “The section below contains the most recent National Eagle Repository Annual Report. We will update this area as new reports become available.” Another lie because no new information has been released since 9/2014

    Besides the carcasses listed here there are thousands of other eagles killed by turbines that
    wandered off and rotted away in fields, making them unfit for repository
    recycling.

    Also be aware that wind farms in America have large freezers for the storage of carcasses. Some of these wind farms have several. Keeping eagle carcasses fresh is important and that is why large insulated shipping boxes that can hold up to 5 eagles and overnight prepaid shipping is used.

    Below are more notes from this USFWS site catered to the wind industry’s handling of carcasses.

    Eagle Shipping Guidelines……………

    The primary objective of The National Eagle Repository (Repository)
    is to receive, evaluate, store and distribute bald and golden eagle
    carcasses, parts, and feathers to tribally enrolled Native Americans of
    Federally recognized tribes throughout the United States for religious
    purposes. The Repository serves as the collection and distribution point
    for bald and golden eagle salvages each year by State and Federal
    wildlife officials.

    Following are guidelines to help you with
    proper documentation, safe handling, packaging and shipping procedures
    so that eagles arrive without damage and in the best possible condition.

    Packaging and Shipping:

    It is important that eagles/parts and feathers be properly packaged in
    order to prevent damage and further decomposition in shipping. Feathers
    damaged in transit to the Repository are unusable to Native Americans
    and will have to be disposed of. Following are shipping requirements
    which MUST be followed to meet carrier (FEDEX) requirements.
    Packaging Methods:

    1. Select a sturdy size box to accommodate the number of eagles being
    shipped and to allow adequate room for the length of the feathers.
    Please DO NOT bend wing or tail feathers as this could cause breakage.
    Appropriate size coolers may be used, except Styrofoam coolers may only
    be used when inserted in a cardboard box. All coolers will be return
    upon request with a return address.
    2. Ship eagles in a frozen state.
    3. Place each eagle in a double plastic bag to prevent leakage.

    4. Line the bottom of the box and fill the remaining space with
    absorbent material, i.e. shredded or wadded up paper or newspaper. This
    will prevent the birds from moving causing damage, help insulate the
    cold and absorb any leakage.
    5. You may use gel packs for ice, but it is NOT necessary if birds are in a frozen solid state when shipped overnight.

    Please note: The Repository does maintain a limited supply of shipping
    boxes for those in need of shipping containers. These boxes are designed
    to hold 4-5 eagles. If shipping less, we recommend the use of an
    adequate small box or ice chest. The Repository is happy to provide a
    prepaid shipping label via email for shipping whole eagle carcasses.

    **Failure to comply with these requirements may result in revocation of the Repository’s shipping privileges.

    Please note: The Repository does maintain a limited supply of shipping
    boxes for those in need of shipping containers. These boxes are designed
    to hold 4-5 eagles. If shipping less, we recommend the use of an
    adequate small box or ice chest. The Repository is happy to provide a
    prepaid shipping label via email for shipping whole eagle carcasses.

    I have a little more important info to add to this…………….Back in 1997 Region 1, which then had most of America’s wind energy, was shipping by far the most eagles to the repository. This is no longer the case because they have been wiped out from wind energy. Most of these carcasses were golden eagles. The numbers to the have grown every year and as of 2016 over 35,000 eagles have been shipped to this facility.

    The Interior Department and wind industry will not say one word about the origin of these eagles. Of course the reason for this is because this agency is completely CORRUPT
    and the wind industry thrives on fraud.

  • Jim Wiegand

    This is an interesting story that ran in America recently. It may be a turning point
    where the people start doing something about rampant green energy fraud
    taking place. “Developer pulls plug on proposed wind farm near Searchlight,” should
    have probably included a subhead stating, “Industry and government fraud
    exposed in wind farm attempt.”.

    In this situation true conservationists with some financial backing, finally
    took the federal Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service to court, arguing the agencies hadn’t adequately analyzed the impacts
    to federally protected species.

    This happens to be the truth, not only for this location but at every wind farm location in America because this industry has been rigging and creating fraudulent research since 1985. I can prove it a hundred times over.

    But there is much more to all this because the Bureau of Land Management and
    the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are in collusion with this industry and the
    production of all this fraudulent impact research. I can also prove this a
    hundred times over.

    Eagle populations are being slaughtered off across the world. Since 1997 the numbers of eagle carcasses from wind energy has grown every year and as of 2016 over 35,000 eagles have been shipped to the Denver Eagle Repository. In 1997 when America had just 1/35 of the installed wind energy we have today, wind energy was already listed as one of the primary sources of the Repository’s eagle carcasses. I have this in writing. Thanks to the Clinton Administration ( including AL Gore) , nothing since has been disclosed about wind energy, dead eagles and the Denver Eagle Repository.

  • Jim Wiegand

    For the honest people living in Australia………..Wind industry and government LIES are real.

    Outside of the US, the truth about wind energy’s horrific impacts on
    species annihilation is much more hidden. Other countries do not have a
    system to recycle eagle parts to Native Americans like that in America.
    Without this system, the public in the UK and other countries have
    absolutely no idea of the eagles being killed by wind energy. God knows
    they certainly will not tell you. Fortunately in America we have such a
    system and this has allowed me to expose the magnitude of this
    mind-numbing industrial slaughter along with the government collusion
    taking place regarding wind energy.