china gives lie to flannery's climate change

  1. 1,647 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 3
    WHICH is the bigger disgrace? A government body which just feeds out complete crap to mislead and deceive the public?

    Or the government that set it up with that precise intention?

    The Climate Commission was supposedly set up to provide in its own self-description, an "independent and reliable source of information" about climate change, international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the economics of a carbon price.

    Independent? Reliable? Only if you are as utterly delusional as its pompously but laughingly revealingly titled "chief climate commissioner," the non-climate scientist Tim Flannery, clearly is.

    And as for calling the sludge and propaganda it churns out 'information," the closest it gets are deceptive and dishonest half-truths.

    Like, in its latest effort, "China leads the world in renewable energy." Left unstated is how utterly insignificant is that renewable energy in comparison to its massive and continuing increase in coal-fired power generation.

    Everything the Climate Commission has done, everything it continues to do, makes an utter mockery of those claimed objectives.

    It is a direct fraud on the Australian public, which the public has to pay for to the tune of some tens of millions.

    The latest effort from its so-called 'chief climate commissioner' really takes the cake with his absurd claim that Australia could be powered "almost entirely by renewable energy."

    Oh yeah. Renewable energy now provides about 10 per cent of our electricity. Sounds like we've got a running start? We've 'only' got to expand it tenfold?

    Except what people like Flannery never tell you in all the headline flummery, is that the overwhelming majority of that comes from hydro power. And nobody's building dams any more.

    Yes, the body of his report does note that some 65 per cent of that 10 per cent comes from hydro. It's arguably closer to 80 per cent in non-drought years.

    That means barely 2 per cent of our total electricity comes from what the average person would think as 'renewable'. Or certainly the sort of renewable that Flannery flummery has flowering all across the countryside. Wind and solar.

    Indeed his report says that only - although, he didn't use that word - around 2.6 per cent of our electricity today comes from wind and solar.

    That means even using his optimistic numbers for current wind and solar generation, we would have to increase our installations of wind and solar by at least forty times what they are today to get 100 per cent of our electricity from these two "plentiful" sources.

    Let that sink in. Imagine all the windmills already out there now, lazily, uselessly, occasionally, turning around, and multiple them by 40.

    At least 40, arguably more like 80 or indeed 160.

    Because they are so fickle and unreliable - even the most optimistic claims are that they produce barely 30 per cent of their 'rated capacity.' So you'd have to put in at least twice as many.

    But that's to produce today's power. Flannery's talking about some decades ahead, when our demands will probably have doubled. So make that a 160-fold increase in windmills.

    And then, you'd still have to keep real power stations, coal or gas, spinning over, because "when the wind don't blow, and the sun don't shine, the power don't flow."

    Indeed, analyst Tom Quirk has given the lie to the claim that provided the windmills are dispersed, the wind has to be blowing somewhere.

    Simply not true. Quirk has detailed how the extensive wind farms, stretching right across from South Australia, through Victoria and across New South Wales have at times generated in total zero or close to zero power.

    None of that is discussed in the Flannery report. Oh no, such actual, real information like that would subtract from the message, more accurately called a Flannery Fantasy.

    And the half-truths. "Rooftop solar may already be the cheapest source of power for retail users in areas with high electricity prices," his report claimed.

    Yes, if you pay ridiculous and unsustainable subsidies for both the installation and then the trickle of difficult and destabilising power that might occasionally dribble into the system.

    Solar and wind could even be the cheapest sources of power for retail users by 2030, Flannery trumpeted. As carbon prices rise, he added.

    Yes, the greatest half-truth of the climate propagandists. Make real power sources ridiculously, unnecessarily expensive and suddenly wind and solar become "cheap."

    Funnily, Flannery has gone, ahem, cold on geothermal. Who needed wind and solar, when according to an earlier Flannery, geothermal would soon be powering Australia.

    Now his report says, in a rare moment of honesty, that what are cutely described as "technical constraints" - ie, it doesn't work - and "high exploration and development costs" - ie, that even if it did, it would be even more expensive than already grossly expensive wind and solar - have to be "overcome," before geothermal became commercially viable.

    Flannery and his Climate Commission are worse than a sick joke. They are an expensive fraud on every Australian. Brought to you by Julia Gillard and Greg Combet of downunder Jurassic Park fame.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/terry-mccranns-column/china-gives-lie-to-flannerys-climate-change-fantasies/story-e6frfig6-1226524498390
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.