Coalition's "clean" coal plan revealed to be an "idiotic" fantasy | RenewEconomy

Coalition’s “clean” coal plan revealed to be an “idiotic” fantasy

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

New analysis reveals new “clean coal” power plants are barely cleaner than current coal plants. Meanwhile, Coalition’s stunt of bringing lump of coal into parliament in middle of crippling heat wave branded as “idiotic” as their energy policy.

(AAP Image/Lukas Coch) NO ARCHIVING
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
(AAP Image/Lukas Coch) NO ARCHIVING
(AAP Image/Lukas Coch)

It’s probably not surprising that Coalition ministers and MPs were cradling the lump of coal brought to Question Time on Thursday by Treasurer Scott Morrison as though it were a treasure from Aladdin’s Cave. After all, their own plan for cheap and clean coal is steeped in as much fantasy as that favourite childhood tale.

Over the past few months the Coalition has been promoting “clean coal” and supposedly modern coal plant technology as a solution for Australia’s power crisis (high prices and high emissions), all the while attacking renewables, and wind energy in particular.

It reached idiotic proportions on Thursday after Engie chose not to switch on its Pelican Point gas plant and supply customers, including many of its own, with power in the midst of a major heatwave (temperatures at 47.8°C in Port Augusta), forcing rolling blackouts that affected 90,000 customers.

The Coalition then chose to blame wind energy, and the theatre culminated in the supply of a lump of coal to parliament house, which, as the Guardian’s Katharine Murphy pointed out, illustrated little more than their own stupidity. “What idiocy is this?” she asked.

The idea of “cheap coal” has already been undone by two separate assessments by Bloomberg New Energy Finance and the Melbourne Energy Institute. Both of whom pointed out that the costs of this “ultra super-critical technology” would be nearly double that of new wind or new solar.

Now, it emerges, it wouldn’t do much for emissions either. It turns out that the government estimates of an emissions intensity of 700g/kWh were based on old estimates, and have been superseded by new analysis from the government’s own research institutions that shows emissions from USC will actually be above the current Australian average of 820g/kWh, not below.

The revelation comes from Dylan McConnell, now of the Climate and Energy College, who points out that the estimates touted by prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, energy minister Josh Frydenberg and treasurer Scott Morrison are based on a 2010 report, since updated.

McConnell says the latest report from the CO2CRC report and analysis from a 2016 ACIL Allen report prepared for the Australian Energy Market Operator, indicates that the emissions from ultra supercritical black coal plants would be around 800grams/kWh.

This does not include so-called scope 2 and scope 3 emissions, which are indirect and fugitive emissions, and which would push the emissions from this technology above the current Australian average.

emissions coal

Indeed, the updated data shows that, contrary to the government estimates, there is little difference between ultra-super critical plants proposed by the Coalition and the super critical plants that exist. (see graph above).

“This so-called ‘clean coal’ is no better than the average emissions intensity of the market, and insignificantly better than regular coal. It defies belief that we are even talking about building one (a new coal plant) in 2017,” McConnell said.

McConnell says this means the clean coal technology would make it impossible to meet even the Coalition’s modest target of 26-28 per cent cut in emissions by 2030, let alone deeper and longer-dated targets.

According to McConnell’s calculations, replacing all the current coal power stations with this USC technology would deliver only a 17.5 per cent cut in emissions from the electricity sector, and lock in those emissions for 30-50 years.

Nationally, the spending of more than $62 billion on these new coal plants would lock in not just much higher energy prices but also achieve just a 5 per cent cut in national emissions by 2030.

Australia’s signing on the Paris climate treaty obliges it – according to the Climate Change Authority and other independent analysis – to reach zero emissions well before 2050.

The Coalition’s push to build more coal – and its attacks on renewable energy targets – have already been discredited by the fossil fuel industry itself, apart from the coal miners looking for a market for their product.

AGL repeated on Thursday that there was no way it would build new coal plants, citing the costs and its commitment to emissions reduction; and the main fossil fuel generator lobby has also conceded that such plant would be impossible to finance.

The Australian Industry Group has pointed out that such a plan would impose huge costs on consumers and manufacturers.

So why is the Coalition pushing it? Judging by its decision to bring a lump of coal to parliament house and promote it as the answer to climate change, energy prices and energy security, it is possibly because it has completely lost the plot.

Its antics have appalled observers, climate experts and political rivals, particularly as millions of people suffer from a heatwave in the midst of a summer setting record breaking temperatures – all surely brought about by climate change and the burning of fossil fuels.

“Instead of focusing on fantasies and bringing big lumps of coal into question time yesterday, which the Treasurer bizarrely did, they should focus on the sort of energy policy that big energy users, the electricity industry, the Energy Markets Commission, the Chief Scientist, and so on are recommending that they look at introducing, and that is an emissions intensity scheme,” Labor’s Mark Butler said.

(Well, that’s not quite true, as Finkel was neutral on it and further analysis of the AEMC numbers undermined the case for the EIS, but underpinned the case for a high renewables target).

And Morrison’s embrace of a lump of coal has set up a storm of protest on Twitter, for instance.

“Instead of focusing on fantasies and bringing big lumps of coal into question time yesterday, which the Treasurer bizarrely did, they should focus on the sort of energy policy that big energy users, the electricity industry, the Energy Markets Commission, the Chief Scientist, and so on are recommending that they look at introducing, and that is an emissions intensity scheme,” Labor’s Mark Butler said.

(Well, that’s not quite true, as Finkel was neutral on it and further analysis of the AEMC numbers undermined the case for the EIS, but underpinned the case for a high renewables target).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

  1. Rob G 3 years ago

    Could this act of government stupidity have been brought about by a threat to cut the donations from the Mineral’s Council? It did look quite panicked.

    • Ray Miller 3 years ago

      Maybe we should follow the money and force all the political parties to declare this week all donations and promises from the Mineral’s Council?
      I gave my local member a serve this morning over this, I would encourage everyone to do the same.

      • FIFO69 3 years ago

        I bet he was quivering in his boots, well done Ray Miller

  2. Keith 3 years ago

    It all had the ring of Tony Abbott and his 3 year long election campaign based on scaremongering about electricity prices.

    Only a couple of things have changed.

    Malcolm Turnbull isn’t at all convincing when he behaves in this foolish manner. Scott Morrison is more convincing….When will they dust off Tony Abbott?

    The other difference is that the Government now has the ABC’s Chris Uhlmann in their team, happy to make a fool of himself mouthing the government absurdities about South Australia, which are clearly “alternative truths” (lies).

    And politicians wonder why the public is fed up with their childish behaviour, while we suffer through dramatic climate change which they should be addressing. Imagine Adelaide heading towards a temperature that has a 5 in front of it?

    • Wayne Leviston 3 years ago

      I used to respect Chirs Uhlmann and his commentary, but he does seem to have a flea in his ear about renewables. Very disappointed that he insists on blaming wind generation for the problems in S.A.

      • Keith 3 years ago

        Hi Wayne,

        All very depressing when a journalist chooses to go with lies for politicians, even if it is to ensure he keeps his job.

        It does nothing for his credibility as a quality journalist.

      • Max de Mestre-Allen 3 years ago

        Wrong. He is blaming lack of wind or too much wind. Wind is unreliable. What is the current cost of per Mwh for wind generated electricity?

    • stalga 3 years ago

      Abbott addressed a meeting of the Young Liberals in late January (many Young Libs are political staffers etc…) and told them the first priority for the year is to attack wind energy.

      Turnbull, days later says ‘electricity prices and energy security’ are the government’s priority. Starts on about the SA storm blackouts, tries to blame wind.

      So Keith, you were right, it does ring of Abbott. Abbott is the real PM, hiding in the shadows as always.

      I contacted my local members office (Liberal) yesterday telling them, ‘not happy please consider these facts’. His staffer emailed me back promptly, thanking me profusely for “speaking out on this one”, updated me on What Weatherall saying live yesterday morning and said ” there will be a lot said and done about this in the next three weeks”.

      Everyone is seeing through this BS, that’s one consolation.

      • Keith 3 years ago

        Hi stalga,

        I was heartened to see on the ABC news last night a comparison of extreme power prices in Queensland and SA. As you are probably aware the extreme prices comes from the power providers withholding gas supply to drive up the price. Queensland has about 100x as many extreme pricing events as does SA (which has very few because the wind mostly prevents this gaming from happening).

        It is obscene that the power provider in SA chose to rig the prices which led to outages, when all they had to do was turn on a gas plant which is there to avoid outages.

        Fortunately, while out politicians engage in sand pit behaviour, the real situation is becoming clear for all to see. The answer of course is more renewable energy. It will be interesting to see how the LNP spins its way out of this. Let’s hope the press stays with the facts and doesn’t engage in Trump-like “alternative” facts.

      • Brian Tehan 3 years ago

        The problem for Turnbull is that a lot more accurate information is out there now, so it’s a lot harder to make up your own facts and get away with it. In fact, Turnbull has made a fool of himself.
        It’s not just Chris Uhlmann at the ABC putting forward “alternative facts” but others on the news and current affairs. Chris Uhlmann has always been very right wing but it’s surprising that there seems to be an editorial policy to misrepresent facts in the energy debate.

  3. Rod 3 years ago

    I thought props were banned in Parliament
    BTW. Will the real Malcolm please stand up. Shouty Malcolm is just as fake as the last five versions,
    Lots of chatter about the Mad Monk making a comeback. OMG

    • Steve159 3 years ago

      “Mad Monk making a comeback” would be the best thing for renewable energy – insofar as the LNP would have no hope of regaining office.

    • Steve159 3 years ago

      “Mad Monk making a comeback” would be the best thing for renewable energy – insofar as the LNP would have no hope of regaining office.

      • MaxG 3 years ago

        I wouldn’t be so sure…

      • Rod 3 years ago

        He honestly believes he will save them.
        In this post truth, Trump dominated World, anything could happen

        • Jens Stubbe 3 years ago

          These clowns are just like Don Quixote attacking windmills. It is so stupid. They actually know they are being evicted. In USA the wind energy association expect to double the installed capacity by 2022, which incidentally is exactly as wind has performed for the last four decades only now wind is simply put cheaper than everything else and only solar is a current runner up. Vestas is now again the major company in USA and theis CFO has stated that the trend (9% cost decrease every year per installed MW capacity is remarkably steady, so the 14% cost decline between 2014 and 2015 was no accident and if you track back to 2008 the annual average cost decline has also been exactly 14%) Vestas is doing fine on every financial metric so when the CFO of Vestas makes a public announcement like that she is not likely to be out of tune with what the company is confident that it can deliver. The CEO of Vestas is even more bullish and have publicly stated they are not competing against the incumbents in wind but against the solar business. This obviously means that Vestas has to up the game because solar last year managed to decrease LCOE by staggering 21%.

          Danfoss that is a world wide major in solar as well as in wind and the single player in the fast emerging osmotic power has made a deal with Vestas and grundfos (the world leader in pumps) to design and build truly massive windturbines.

          The harbour in Esbjerg is undergoing a big overhaul to be able to handle 25MW turbines.

          Vestas has managed to keep the number of employees through a time where they have been able to increase the stock market valuation by a factor +20.

          This stupid ostrich behavior your Australian political leaders stupidly seconded by the equally inept Trump administration will lead to nothing but even bigger collapse of all fossil supply chains and businesses.

          • Rod 3 years ago

            Unfortunately, Australia and the US are very similar in our Public education standards.
            This has left us with the kind of illiterate, misinformed voter that will believe the likes of Trump and our Neo Conservative government lies about things like immigration and “green” energy.
            In both countries, energy has been politicised and the economics of energy choices (and the subsequent costs of environment and health) have been ignored.

          • Calamity_Jean 3 years ago

            “In both countries, energy has been politicised and the economics of energy choices (and the subsequent costs of environment and health) have been ignored.”

            Rupert Murdoch, who is an important influence in the media of both nations, might have something to do with that.

          • Rod 3 years ago

            Yes, I can’t fathom his motivation.
            Maybe lots of climate induced disasters sell more newspapers.

  4. Andrew Thaler 3 years ago

    #alternateFacts rule.

    Never let real, actual, measurable, un-arguable facts get in the way of making a political point.

  5. solarguy 3 years ago

    I’m afraid this farce by the government isn’t over by a long shot, this insane posturing by Turdbull and his loony ministers will keep going as their FF masters are now getting desperate to pull the wool over the eyes of the people. OMG how long to the election.

    • DevMac 3 years ago

      Once enough of the power mongers have divested from coal (and left it in the hands of super funds and mum-and-dad battlers), there’ll be a flip-flop like you’ve never seen.

      • solarguy 3 years ago

        Let me get this story straight. Who do think the power mongers are? And why do you think divesting from coal is a bad thing?

        • FIFO69 3 years ago

          It doesn’t matter mate, everyone is an idiot left wing ideological fool here. You too!

          • Stephen Barnes 3 years ago

            Oh your funny really

          • john 3 years ago

            The only idiots in this story are the poor deluded fools who think that the world is going into an ice age soon.
            In fact yes the world should be going into an ice age but it seems some aspect of the earths makeup is stopping that.
            Now it is not the amount of energy coming from the sun.
            You have obviously been well sucked in by the likes of WUWT with its pathetic misinformation.
            If you can not relate to the fact that the climate is not the same as it was 40 or 50 years ago you must have zero sensitivity.
            The legacy being left by the population post the second world war is going to be hated by the descendants and they will be reviled as self interested stupid people.

          • DarylMc 3 years ago

            Is there any part of this article you would like to claim is not true?
            The government’s response to SA blackouts is pretty bizarre.

        • DevMac 3 years ago

          I think divesting from coal is a good thing, and the power mongers are the people pulling the strings behind the Libs’ inexplicable continued backing of coal over newer, cleaner, and cheaper power generation technologies.
          My prediction is that the Libs, if still in power by the time the ‘power mongers’ are far enough out of the coal business so as to lose minimal money / power, the Libs will change their tune 180 degrees.

    • FIFO69 3 years ago

      I thing mal is making pragmatic choices. If you were in his position I assume you would be out the door quicker than an investor in large scale unsubsidised solar grid supply

      • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

        And a $billion Australian taxpayer gift to one company Adani, for one project – Carmichael, which cannot even guarantee its own business model beyond a few years due to a multitude of international uncertainties? A project which all brand-name financiers have scrutinised and then walked away from?

        This bulk-bet and high-risk leakage to our national budget into one coal project, is better that a spectrum of solar subsidies how exactly?

        • FIFO66 3 years ago

          More anti-coal rhetoric from an ignoramus.

  6. Tom 3 years ago

    $62 Billion!

    You could install a Tesla Powerwall 2 into every Australian home for that. Wind intermittence problem solved!

    • Pedro 3 years ago

      And if you chose an Australian made product you would boost manufacturing and employment as well.

      • MaxG 3 years ago

        Who wants that? We rather sign another trade agreement and hand sovereignty over to corporations (e.g like the TPP)

        • Pedro 3 years ago

          Lol, need to thank those that voted for Trump for tearing up the TPP.

          • Calamity_Jean 3 years ago

            Yeah, that’s the only good thing that has come from his election.

          • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

            That’s right, we need to pay more for all of our basic consumer goods, and stomp on and retard the nuanced export markets for us that a middle class Asia would provide. Hooray for our dumb-fuck Trump-like thinking!

          • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

            As you can probably tell from below I’m a fan of the TPP and disappointed it was scuttled. Yes most of the direct benefit would have gone to countries like Vietnam, but that would have benefited us in the long run as they became wealthier our exports to them would have grown.

      • Tom 3 years ago

        Absolutely agree. There used to be a time in the late ’80s and early ’90s that Australian universities were on the cutting edge of solar technology and battery technology – leading the world.

        Then some ideological zealots (on both sides of politics) decided that universities should be treated like businesses and that research that was not immediately profitable was dispensable, and also that manufacturing isn’t important in an “advanced” economy and can be left to the South East Asia and later China.

        Everyone in the world should know that Australian made energy generation and storage equipment is the best, but instead we’ll be buying it all in.

        • Pedro 3 years ago

          Thanks Tom, I started in the PV industry when the only business was in solar off grid. PV, batteries and inverters. It has always worked and worked well and is definitely not new. Australia has a proud history of pioneering PV and all the hardware to make it work.

          Australia is excellent at exporting our IP and not getting a cracker for it.

    • FIFO69 3 years ago

      Good call, 20 year payback on that bullshit in limited circumstances. Forget about supplying to industry that is the lifeblood of the economy. I assume you aren’t an economist or engineer.

      • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

        Hey hey, what a big improvement! Well done son. You’ve gone from saying a “106 year” payback, to a “40 year” payback, to now a “20 year” payback. That’s awesome progress in just a week. You’re still wrong by double (the correct answer is a 10 year payback) but I like the direction you are headed in – towards reality.

        • FIFO68 3 years ago

          Can you provide some calculations to justify this ’10 year payback’ fantasy?

          Or are you just being an ignorant fool again?

          • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

            Well you were wrong on “106 years” and you were wrong on “40 years”, so you probably should be asking yourself if you’re wrong again on “20 years”.

            Just go back and re-read the calculation I did for you in my first reply on the subject.

          • FIFO66 3 years ago

            No thanks, I can feel myself getting more stupid every time I read something you write.

          • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

            Suit yourself.

    • FIFO68 3 years ago

      Good call, industry and go jump off a bridge, I’m sure they dont need reliable power supply, who needs em right.. Tom for PM!

  7. Andrew Roydhouse 3 years ago

    If only Scott had told the truth and owned up that all he got from Santa was a lump of coal!

  8. Chris Fraser 3 years ago

    I suppose the ‘stunt’ doesn’t really edify the Government of Australia’s knowledge of why it’s unseasonably hot. We could start by turning off the AC in the House …

  9. Askgerbil Now 3 years ago

    The LNP Government is making quite a fuss on coal power plants and renewable energy targets.
    This coincides with a recent report by the National Australia Bank on the damage the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export industry was doing: dramatically increasing energy costs for industry and households, with a further 50 percent price increase by 2020 on the cards.

    You might think the LNP’s fuss and noise about nothing of any substance is perhaps a carefully crafted diversion from the real damage its energy policy has done to industry and cost-of-living pressures.

    See for example “LNG exports and heatwaves drive up energy costs”

  10. phred01 3 years ago

    It’s a no brainer anyone with a kindergarten education education knows there is no such thing as clean coal technology. Clean coal pilot plants were a scam to get a govn’t free cash handout

    • FIFO69 3 years ago

      Please provide justification for your ridiculous statements

      • Brian Tehan 3 years ago

        The only “clean” coal technology is where you get the co2 emissions, compress the gas, using about 20% of your power output, put the gas in the ground and hope it stays there for a while – while you move away from coal.
        What’s the point? None, because it costs much more than renewables if and when they can get a large scale system up.

      • Farmer Dave 3 years ago

        Really? I have just checked, and my PV panels are still working just fine. 19 kWh so far today, and it has been cloudy at times, too. Last time I had to fire up my pellet heater it worked just fine, so I don’t think that renewable heat is dead. What exactly do you think has died?

        • FIFO68 3 years ago

          19kwh, sounds great. In that case maybe you can disconnect your house from the grid. While you are at it, throw away your diesel backup generator, you obviously won’t be needing it based on your report.

          Since you obviously are proud to be a farmer responsible for clearing and destruction of a couple of hundred of hectares of land for your own personal financial gains maybe you can offset the co2 footprint of that too.

          Report back in a year with results.

      • Gary Rowbottom 3 years ago

        Really? Even in the coalition’s lowly ambitions, it wants to increase renewable energy share from its current share (about 14.6%) to around 23.5% by 2020. Err.. that is growing buddy.

      • Ken Fabian 3 years ago

        It’s a multi-decade transition and whilst renewables cannot immediately replace fossil fuels, they have already passed crucial price thresholds, which is reflected in the rapid growth in their use. Even their intermittency can be made to have a contributing role in this transition, by creating a de-facto price on fossil fuels (forcing raised prices outside periods of abundant wind and solar).

        Fossil fuel plant operations need to deliberately shift into the role of backup, within a framework that provides appropriate, but not excessive rewards for the time left off-line – whilst at the policy level and for future investments, enduring, low emissions solutions to that intermittency should be encouraged and supported.

        To some extent we cannot know exactly how the later stages of this transition are achieved or what it will cost but, given the climate problem, commitment to the early stages, within our reach, is both appropriate and necessary.

  11. MaxG 3 years ago

    It is that simple: stupid people vote for stupid leaders… they are in power for a reason…

  12. DevMac 3 years ago

    Maybe someone from the Labour Party should bring in some of the ash that was being blown around Port Augusta a few weeks ago?

    Edited to remove: It’s what the Liberals get from Santa, so they figure it must be good (was beaten to the punch by Andrew Roydhouse)

    • Rod 3 years ago

      I’d like to see Mark Butler take in the Gruen Polished Turd trophy now that props are allowed.
      Sorry, couldn’t find a picture of it.

  13. Radbug 3 years ago

    This circus basically sums up this anti-intellectual country. You hire a Chief Scientist, because you lack qualifications in science, and then tell him you know better. GB had/has a trade-based industrial culture and we inherited it. Go to Foix Trades Museum (SW France) and see how accomplished illiterate, skilled men were in the Middle Ages. GB never changed, and neither have we. GB went obsolete and so have we.

  14. Syd Walker 3 years ago

    How disappointing that Mr Morrison treats his favourite fossil fuel in such an impersonal manner.

    As anyone from Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal can explain, that lump of coal has a name: Hector.

    Hector deserves more respect than to be waved around anonymously in Parliament like some kind of lumpen proletarian.

    There’s more about Hector here:

    Notice how handsome he looks in his smart yellow jacket!

    It’s true that naughty green extremists have sniggered at Hector – and even suggested he should be laid to rest forever –

    If Mr Morrison was a true friend of coal he’d use his parliamentary pulpit to stand up for Hector’s right to be incinerated, along with billions of fellow coal-lumps.

    • FIFO69 3 years ago

      You do understand that dally Bay and hay point export steel making coal, not thermal coal.

      Maybe you should take the moral high ground and not use a any metals in your life.

      • john 3 years ago

        There is in fact a percentage of thermal coal exported mainly from Dally Bay. When the floods happened to stop production both were exporting as much Thermal as they could get their hands on.
        Or at least the mines were as the ports are only stockpile loading facilities.

        • FIFO69 3 years ago

          99% is met coal

  15. Sally Noel Triggell 3 years ago

    The only peole more stupid than the lieberal front bench are the people that vote for them. Well done MSM you have brainwashed so many people that I fear we have lost our democracy. Our children and grand children will pay a terrible price for our gullibility.

  16. Jens Stubbe 3 years ago

    Onshore wind down 14% year to year between 2014 and 2015, Offshore down 66% over four years. Solar down 21% from 2015 to 2016.

    Onshore wind is now approximately 66% off from the price point where Synfuels overtake fossil fuels, offshore is 75% off and solar at high insolation areas is 60% off.

    My friends in offshore wind expects 40% cost decrease over the next few years and several of the big public traded players has also indicated this including the largest producers of fundaments and the second largest installer of offshore wind power.

    The shallow waters of the North Sea can produce enough electric power to supply the entire electricity demand in Europe including electrifying the entire transportation sector. 40% off for offshore wind means that no other form of energy will be cheaper in Europe say for osmotic power (another interesting concept out of Denmark) that has a single power plant in operation that has been built according to design and budget and have been operated according to plan for almost a year. The target for this first full scale power plant is to produce power at $0,013/kWh, which seems to be achievable. Once this is moved to industrial scale the power will be much cheaper and the inventor owns one of the largest industrial corporations in Denmark that is a global major in solar, wind, energy efficiency and many other business.

    This is understood in Europe and every oil & gas company is trying to divest and there has been more layoffs in the North Sea oil & gas than there are people occupied in clean tech. The entire infrastructure developed for oil & gas is racing to offshore wind. Currently the cheapest oil in the North Sea has a break even cost around $20/barrel, so the possible future for oil and gas is extremely limited in time.

    All the while the efficiency of electrolysis is growing fast as well and the materials used are decreasing in weight, size and cost equally fast. More than two dozens of Synfuel projects are funded in Denmark and this field is moving incredibly fast.

    Oil and gas is far better positioned than coal so how can your government be so incredibly stupid to believe that coal has a fighting chance?

    In Denmark the standard for coal power plants has been +47% electric conversion efficiency and co-production of district heating for about four decades now and we expect coal to be out phased by 2023!!!!

    There is mothballed research that targeted 60% electric conversion but no-one expected any future for coal (DONG is the major operator of coal plants in Denmark). DONG sunk about $2 billion into advanced high efficiency NG power plants and advanced coal power plants with CCS only to completely abandon those investments simply because of pure economics. Shell made a deal with an inventer worth $300 mill. who had sorted out how to turn coal into plasma meaning you could achieve the same efficiency for coal as for Combined Cycle NG power plants. This works but Shell has scrapped the technology. No one in their right mind sees any future for coal.

    There is in general absolutely no future for fossil fuels – not because of legislation or consumer concerns or environmental concerns but simply because of cost.

    • FIFO69 3 years ago

      Enough talk lets see it

      • RobSa 3 years ago

        Yes I want wind farms all over the place. Every local government should have them. Coastal areas should have a wind farm every 50 kms or so.

      • Jens Stubbe 3 years ago

        If you look back at the ridiculous streak of one after the other stupid market projection for wind power and solar power and plot the real market progress and the real cost reduction you will see a shockingly discrepancy between reality as it unfolded and desperately pessimistic projections. Last year Berkeley released a report for windpower where the projections 30 years into the future was blown away and undercut by 30% two month after the report release.

        Now the offshore wind business claim that within this decade they will deliver a further 40% cost decline – how can the already in crisis fossil supply chains deal with this brute force?

        One of the often neglected truths about the wind power pioneers is that right from the get going they planned to disrupt fossils and now they are moving in for the kill.

        I think wind power is walking the talk and so is the solar businesses although they were less ideological than the wind pioneers and also much slower moving up until the Chinese decided to blow the fuse.

  17. Les Johnston 3 years ago

    The incidence is one of dark matter where the actors have no comprehension of the plot. The climate is changing. This is not a joke.

    • john 3 years ago

      While you are correct in the Alternate Fact viewpoint they actually do not wish to acknowledge that.
      The pathetic child like behavior just reduces these clowns to norty boys who should be made to wash their mouths out and sent to the time out corner.

  18. RobSa 3 years ago

    In the near future we will come after people like Morrison. We will pursue them with retroactive legislation that expands criminal law in relation to the environment. We will come after them for their criminal negligence in relation to not preserving our environment from the dangers of global heating.

  19. Chris Marshalk 3 years ago

    The picture above is Barnaby Joyce holding a lump of Gina Rinehart turd.

  20. Alex Hromas 3 years ago

    I can’t understand all the fuss ever since the “children overboard” incident the Libs have never let facts get in the way of a great political sound grab. Its just business as usual.

  21. larry w 3 years ago

    Has Adani run out of offshore trusts and needs to pay his court jesters in product?

  22. larry w 3 years ago

    Many of us with solar tech on our Aussie rooves realise they should be on every roof, with batteries at home, or community storage closeby. Houses can be designed to need less air con cooling or none at all. Our Federal government are contemptible and failing lynching need to be impeached.

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.