Is it time for gun control in Washington?

O

Oh? Perhaps you'd like to outline for us the notable philosophical differences between the parties in the key federal areas of defence, security, health, education, social services etc etc. Only on energy is there a clear differntial in policy.

 

No, your jibes are perfectly transparent, I just choose to ignore them. Feel free to challenge my facts, if you can...

 

We use Donald Trump's bible

Then again, after the last few months I should at least try to use something other than my brain

 

I don't know why you bother with the *rick.

He only posts populist stuff re Trump without being bothered looking for the real facts.

 

My opinion on Trump is pretty much the same as it is on you....I wouldn't shake hands with him either..

 

In my opinion there’s not enough difference on energy policy.
If the Libs promised to dump Paris I reckon they’d be in much better shape.

 

I think the pollsters of the under 35 demographic tell the numbers men a different story.

 

So what? Most under 35s don’t vote Liberal anyway.

 

Chicken / egg... they've been working on it for years.

 

I think the Turnbull experiment shows there’s nothing in it for the Libs to try to appeal to people who would never vote for them anyway.
In other words, their shift to the Left under him didn’t work, and they lost a lot of their core as well.

 

What future reference....that's current for at least the past 3 times we've met.

 

Australia is already on a trajectory to meet the current Paris targets

The Greens / Labour opposition to the NEG was that the emissions targets were too low and that Australia was going to meet them anyway. In order to support the NEG they wanted either higher emissions targets set in to the legislation ( which are difficult to change in future) or accept lower targets now but set by regulation ( which can be easily changed , ie increased ) by a ( Labour) minister in the future. Neither was palatable to the coalition, but given the choice Turnbull was in favour of higher targets set in to legislation. The majority of Liberal party would not support that and got rid of the PM instead .
And while we are talking about emissions targets, Australia's chief scientist Alan Finkel has admitted we could shut this nation down and evacuate it, reducing our emissions to zero, and the effect on global climate would not be discernible.

Fom my perspective the key propblem with the NEG is that energy retailers were responsible for the continuity of supply ( guarantee). But energy retailers do not generate power so they have no real control over supply. It is akin to making a service station responsible for the supply of petrol, even though they don't own the oilfield, refinery or transport, or a shop responsible for the supply of bread, even though they dont own or control farms or bakeries. Its a dumb policy, the supply guarantees should sit with the generators who have some control over this.

The push for the NEG was as the result of the supply failures in the SA energy market, caused by the stupid energy policy of the SA Labour state government.
The SA push for the NEG was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to deflect blame by the state government from their failed energy policy (with an SA election looming) by enlisting their fellow state Labour governments to create a diversion by forcing the Federal government through COAG to create a "policy" to guarantee energy. This policy quickly became hijacked in to a discussion about emission's reduction, which of course has nothing to do with supply guarantees.
Fortunately the SA voters werent stupid and kicked out the useless SA Labour government at the first opportunity.

The issue with energy prices is that in the last 10 years the increase in renewables have vastly increased the volatilty in energy supply, when the sun shines and the wind blows there is too much power and the wholesale energy price is nearly zero, at other times there is virtually no renewable supply in the market and standby diesel / gas turbine and hydro attempts to fill the demand (at very high prices) and some industry also shuts down to reduce demand / save cost during these times. Energy retailers use financial instruments to hedge against wholesale price variations and the cost of this is passed on to the consumer.
Baseload (coal) power stations are still the major supplier of low cost reliable baseload power but as their financial viability is impacted by the variabilty of prices caused by renewables supply fluctuation the owners of baseload power stations are not willing to invest to keep them operating indefinately.
Finally while renewable advocates will proudly announce that their per Kwh cost of supply is nearly the same as that of a baseload power stations this conveniently ignores the fact that you need around 2.5 times the capactity of renewables ( in a distributed grid ) to provide the same reliabilty of energy supply as a baseload power station. That won't change much until there is a much lower cost method of energy storage.

 

F^&K....you got THAT one right!

 

Actually the elephant in the room that's never mentioned is that government did ONCE control power prices since the generators were publicly owned; since privatisation any government belating about power proces is just pure BS. And of course the fact that most peoples bills have escalated more from usage than actula c/kW blowouts.

 

Surely you can not be serious.
Are you really suggesting that people are out of line for wanting - in 2018 - to be able to heat the house when they’re cold and cool it when they’re hot?
Give me strength.
The truth is this climate change myth/religion and the lefty lunatics (most of whom, ironically, are rich enough not to have to worry about power bills) are 100% responsible for the high price of power.

 

Frankly it makes me angry when rich Lefty’s talk down at people about power prices.
The price of electricity has more than doubled in SA in the last few years, and it is entirely because of green / left policies.
Nothing else. Power should be getting cheaper, not more expensive.

The “Climate change” myth is a bunch of ******** which does nothing more than give millions of useless beard-scratching academics something to do in between coffee breaks.

 

No of course people are free to use what they like, but nothing in life is free... Actually, when I checked here https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Retail Electricity Inquiry - Preliminary report - 13 November 2017.pdf
I was surprised to find that nationally it IS actually the rate which has escalted faster (47% since 2007) than total bill amount (30%) although the report attributes most of the difference to the offset provided by personal alternatives (ie PVs etc). The big deal seems to be that electricity prices have escalated faster than any other price (or wages) in the period, although the report sets out quite a few reasons (no single reason) for why. It's worth a read...