‘It can’t be done’: Renewable energy investment drops by 80 per cent 

Sounds like a Bowen "plan".....designed to FAIL, as he always does.

@@wyattfamily8997 True, That !

Wind and solar farms in the UK last 25 to 40 plus years and produce cheaper electricity than any other form of production. Australia must have a much more wind and sunshine than the UK.

@@robinwhitebeam4386 A great comment for non-Engineers and s t u p i d people! You can search for "turbine graveyard Sweetwater Texas" if you dare (or are not the "standard" YT AI-generated "commenter"). The poster was correct - 10 to 15 years is what the "wind farm" lasted in Texas. They are already being taken down and NOT replaced.

@@robinwhitebeam4386ah, they let out a parrot. 😂

We are already BETTER THAN NetZero. In a 2014 CSIRO Report by Dr. Vanessa Haverd she pointed out that Australia emitts 485 Million tons of Co2 Per Year, but ABSORBS 2.2 BILLION Ton Per Year. Since that time Australia has further reduced its Co2 by a further 25% whilst still ABSORBING 2.2 BILLION TONS Per Year. So we are already at BETTER than NetZero, but you'll never hear that FACT from Blackout Bowen.

According to the math ,land mass ,population, trees...Australia is net zero.

Try telling that to the Dullards in Canberra.

Do you mean the effects of some of the most expensive electricity in the world, or the effects of decreased reliability?

@@cerealport2726 Both. Also the EFFECTS of the impact to the environment. Some are aware of HOW many of the elements that comprise these "green" - wind turbine and solar - systems are stripped from the earth. Also, my family has a fair amount of farm acreage. Certain companies contact them regularly to entice the family to allow the placement of a "solar farm" on some VERY GOOD farmland. Of course, once a "solar farm" is placed on the land, that land is good for nothing for a decade or two. Then there is the issue of CLEANUP after the "solar farm" lease expires.

Indeed. We have energy policy based upon two mass psychoses (the false and delusional belief that mans effects on the earth’s climate are significant and dangerous and the false and delusional belief that transitioning to non fossil fuel energy sources will be cheap and easy). The ridiculous ban on nuclear power plants is based upon the false and delusional belief that nuclear power plants are unsafe. Popular delusions are dangerous and can lead to economic ruin war and genocide. We are currently burdened with a large cohort of dishonest duplicitous politicians who are colluding with ridiculous and economically destructive popular delusions in order to garner the votes of the ignorant and ill informed.

Renewable energy is a scam

Credlin is not a reporter, she has no qualifications in journalism. She is just a Liberal Party propagandist. Dont dare say that she is a journalist.

That’s the tip of the iceberg- the price of everything increases: normal people will starve, 1st world countries will fail 3rd world nations ( who never subscribed to this nonsense) will thrive- if not take over: only the elites in the western world will be ok😮😢

He's mostly on Telegrams, using the user name

@lukasTRS

Think of supply vs demand. If others used less petrol, your petrol would be cheaper. (I know the petroleum market isn’t that simple and this outcome wouldn’t necessarily happen)

In theory. The Dullards in Canberra would increase the excise duty.

Ram Hybrid arriving late 2024 double the range of the standard model and can carry your big heavy loads. Oh and it's filled with minerals from the Pilbara processed in China.

Fun fact: many here will believe anything the Murdoch media tell them.

Fun fact: The whole idea of wind farms is to reduce CO2 and pollution not add to it.

The blades aren't fuel. They are shredded and mixed into the cement. Coal is the fuel burned for cement.

@williamanthony915 makes no difference, so long as they aren't blighting the landscape as barely functioning monuments to shortsighted government idiocy.

Hey, I appreciate wind turbines. I have tons of money invested in coal, and if people want to burn coal making millions of turbines, then all the better for me. I make a lot of money with my coal being shipped to China to make wind turbines that wear out after a few years in the ocean from the sea salt.

People don't understand that baseload generation - ie big coal and nuclear plants designed to run more or less 24/7 - is an endangered species in our competitive and increasingly renewables grid. Solar power increasingly drives wholesale electricity prices into negative territory for much of the day, forcing baseload generators to curb supply. And traditional coal and nuclear isn't good at rapid ramping up and down to back-up spiky renewables generation. It's why our coal stations are closing early. And it's why nuclear would not make an economic return here.

@@gibbonsdp keep believing what you type, if you want, but it's really not right. Despite a lot of effort being put into energy efficiency, there is a minimum of electricity required to keep everything ticking over. AEMO data shows that this is around 18-19 Gigawatts for the East coast states and SA, and that's at lowest consumption - at about 3-4am, every day. Realistically, renewables plus batteries cant be trusted to supply this regularly now, and probably never will be able to without bankrupting the country. As renewable energy sources increase, so does the need for backup supplies to meet the frequent and unpredictable changes in wind and solar availability. Often gas, or in South Australia, gas and diesel are used instead, often in the cheapest generators possible (like open cycle gas turbines), which emit more CO2 per unit of fuel burned than something designed to run continuously. Batteries exist mostly for frequency control, as they cannot sustain useful output as part of a grid (but they do definitely have benefits when applied elsewhere). Frequency control is also where the big money is, hence the rush to install cash cows disguised as batteries.

Sorry, but you can't pin that badge on renewables. It's already being worn by fossil fuels.

EVs with smart V2G (two-way) chargers will smooth the spikes rather than exacerbate them, and get paid by the grid for doing so.

@@gibbonsdp Right, so the grid can such energy out of your car rather than charge it when you need it. This does nothing to resolve the fundamental problem of increased energy demands on supply and distribution network. Get real and stop looking for a free lunch.

Plan X- depopulate

Most efficient energy source there is.

@@bowwing333 : Every communist the world over agrees with you. As long as the people being depopulated are Jews and Christians communists are fine with it.

@@wrongfullyaccused7139 💯 sir. Just waiting for Rattusfinkus or Tassied12 to troll through here and tell us all how cheap renewables are and how expensive and inefficient nuclear is. 😂 I think Australians are finally becoming aware of the truth about renewables as a system. But i still think the vast majority of Australians lack sufficient knowledge of nuclear energy….

The most expensive and difficult to build energy. Yeah sure.

"At my house we generate five times more electricity than we consume." Same here. I export 30-40 kW per day to the grid and am working to expand this to exporting 5 kW to the grid 24/7 using solar power and batteries or solar pumped storage between some spare 5,000 gallon water tanks. Then I'm look to upgrade from single phase to 3 phase power, so I can export 15 kW. I will be supplying the energy needs of 24 houses with the electricity I provide at 1/3 of the cost of what my electricity company charges clients. If enough people (houses, businesses, car parks, shopping malls, schools, warehouses, workshops, etc) do similar, we can make a *huge* difference. Morons out there claiming this cannot work. I'm getting on a doing it.

Either you run a few lights or you have a massive amount of panels .Which one?

The capital costs

Rooftop solar panels are an economical supplement in favourable sunny areas. Storage batteries are rather expensive and the installation costs and depreciation would usually exceed the costs of using power from the grid. Additionally a back up diesel generator would be necessary to cover prolonged periods of inclement weather in many areas.

A Feed-in Tariff website states: 15c/kWh for the first 10kWh per day and .7c kWh thereafter. Solar panels with a daily output of 40kWh would return $3.60 a day.

Chasing the dream, you must be on good tariff money and you also have no idea how much electricity a shopping mall needs. If you get time have a look on the web how many panels a medium steel plant needs 750 000. Use solar powered steel mill. And thats between 10 in the morning to 3 in the afternoon no night or afternoon shift there. Don't even start with batteries. You call who idiots.

​@@user-hs8qj2fi9y I have done the analysis for my local shopping mall, which consists of a massively spread out building and surrounding car parks - covering the buildings and parking lots with solar panels, and it certainly does make sense in sunny Qld to offset a hell of a lot of usage. And with the added benefit of providing much needed shade for cars and shade for pedestrians. As I said, we need to be putting solar panels on places like shopping malls before we even think of putting them across farm land or clearing trees to install solar panels or wind turbines. I never said anything about steel plants - these do have mind boggling energy requirements.

Very True, but the renewables zealots don’t care about the engineering and physics. It’s all about investor profits- screw the consumer.

Might as well have enough baseload generation to allow supply to meet demand. Might as well minimise environmental damage at the same time. Might as well make it zero emissions too. Will have to make that nuclear then.

@@footbru I don’t know, why don’t you ask a nuclear vendor? When will you lower the consumer electricity price with your system of intermittent renewables?

​@footbru 5 to 10 years. Unfortunately for us we should have started sooner but Bowen got in the way.

@@footbrui asked you… when do you lower consumer electricity prices with renewables?

@@footbru You’re the renewables zealot… you do have all the answers don’t you? Because you invested heavily in a flawed technology?

what?????????????

Dreamer. Perpetual motion does not exsit. You need schooling bad.

@@user-hs8qj2fi9y I think you replied to the wrong comment.

Beer googles x2.

But it's inevitable. Modern cars are computers on wheels and need to talk with Mama. Not least to give Mama the opportunity to monetise all the data they collect.

Not to mention that it's a self contained system Australia has the largest uranium deposit in the world vs relying on China to supply our power generation

Wef

😂 sure vince…. Is that why BHP wanted SMRs to run their smelters? Because they A. Actually worked and B. Were cheaper to run than an inefficient and complicated system of intermittent wind and solar. You best check your story champ…. 😂

@@footbru What one of the 80 designs in development or approvals now? Go google the SMR vendors- there are a great many options. I’m not going to spoon feed you. Leave your emotions at the door and let the engineering and physics do the talking. Time for Australia to put its big boy pants on and grow the hell up and embrace the most powerful energy source available to humanity.

There is no dream to stop it. Electrification just requires technology that actually works. The simple truth is that solar is ineffective for the scale of electricity generation we need: not enough, can’t store enough and supply can’t meet demand. That is without replacing our ICE fleet with millions of EVs. Nuclear is the future of electricity generation- nothing else can do it- you just need to better understand the physics and engineering. EVs are similarly not good enough as a technology yet. Too expensive, too short a battery lifespan and too short ranged, especially when towing. The charging takes too long and the infrastructure is not installed at the scale required yet and it too is exceptionally expensive. Electrification will come, but not yet and not quickly because the technology is not ready yet. Not a silver bullet solution either: electricity will not power aircraft or ships, nor will it be suitable for large trucks. Carbon neutral fuels and hybrid ICE will be part of the effort to decarbonise. As must hydrogen- again the tech is not ready for that yet either. All technology must be utilised to decarbonise transportation. Luckily we already have geothermal, hydroelectric and nuclear energy to provide baseload electricity supplies. Intermittent energy like wind and solar will never do it all on their own.

@@polarbear7255 To conquer the market, electric cars (EVs) only have to be technically superior to the Internal Combustion Engine cars (ICE). It’s clearly the case. 1. EVs are simpler to make: Tesla, for instance, has reduced the number of pieces for the front part of the vehicle from 70 pieces to only one. (It’s the same thing for the rear part of its vehicles.) 2. Tesla, BYD and Volvo demonstrated that it was possible to produce profitable EVs; something legacy producers like GM or Toyota are unable to do. It’s because they feared bankruptcy that many companies stopped producing EVs. 3. The price of EVs is falling rapidly due to the rapidly falling price of their batteries (- 30% in 2023). 4. No cobalt or nickel are used to produce the most modern EVs. 5. EVs pollute much less than ICE cars, especially when they move. 6. EVs are more stable on roads because their heavy batteries are located at the bottom of the car. 7. EVS protect better their occupants when there is a collision due to the rigidity of their battery packs. 8. There are fewer than ten (10) moving parts in an EV engine compared to more than a thousand in an ICE car. 9. EVs accelerate more rapidly than ICE cars when their drivers try to overtake other cars. 10. The brakes on an EV last much longer due to their regenerative braking system. 11. The dashboard of an EV is much simpler to produce since almost all the controls are on the on-board computer. 12. There are fewer liquids in an EV (windshield cleaning fluid, battery fluid). 13. EVs are roomier than ICE cars because their engines are much smaller. 14. Most technical problems on an EV can be solved ¨over the air¨ without having to go to a dealer. 15. EVs don’t need to go to the dealer for regular maintenance. 16. Everybody can buy an EV on the Internet without having to go to a dealer. 17. Recharging an EV is 80% cheaper than filling the tank of an ICE car. 18. Nowadays, there are multiple ways to produce electricity. (N.B. In 2023, solar panels are the cheapest way to produce electricity). 19. Nowadays, charging stations are everywhere while the number of gas stations is decreasing. 20. Contrary to ICE cars, EVs can be recharged at home. 21. EV owners say they have no problem with the autonomy of their vehicle. 22. If EVs explode from time to time, 200,000 ICE cars explode every year in USA. 23. Etc.

Actually no. In terms of cost per kWh grid scale GW class nuclear reactors can provide electricity at a cheaper cost per kWh than your rooftop solar. Nuclear is extremely cost competitive with wind and coal and only marginally more expensive than grid scale solar PV, but is more reliable with a capacity factor at least 3 times higher. Rooftop solar systems also fuel a negative feedback loop of increasing consumer electricity prices. The more that is installed the more energy companies have to hike prices to maintain profit margins.

@@footbru😂 what? like you know any better?!😂😂

@@polarbear7255either way, rooftop solar provides some daytime resilience. If power lines break due to a fire or storm or crash, rooftop solar can continue to provide power. For businesses (and for those working from home), this can power business to continue. The chances of a giant plant going down is higher than the chances of all rooftop solar going down at once. This comment isn’t arguing for or against non-rooftop solar power.

I agree with all that, I like rooftop solar and a battery bank for the utility of it being available during a power outage

@@JamielDeAbrew Yes it does. But you need to be able to disconnect from the grid and have a large enough battery with back up generator. Not every one can do that.

Where exactly is that?

@@kenreckless2757large parts of Australia. A good video about it is from the electric Viking.

​@@jalexand007Where exactly? The site you are referring to is a proponent of renewables and likely a beneficiary too. They will never put out the full story about renewables or the damage being done to the environment.

@@margaretarmstrong2445 sorry that is not what that guy is about. He debunks bad stories to get the truth out there.

@@jalexand007 What absolute nonsense. If you only read content that promotes and markets so called green energy then all you will get is propaganda. I am living in the nightmare of a 20,000 square kilometre renewable energy zone and the destruction of the environment is horrendous. We wrote a paper a few years ago, look it up " Wind and Solar Electricity Generation are the Answer. Seriously? " Nothing that was written has been proven wrong.

How much energy is generated on a windless night. Let me do the math. 0+0 =0.

And you point is???? And 40% is about the reasonable maximum for wind and solar. Every night the sun goes down and solar panels don't generate electricity from moon light. Most summer nights the wind also drops to near zero about 10.00pm along the East Coast. So for about the next 8 hours solar and wind produce NOTHING. What do you think will power the aluminum smelter?? Fairy dust?

@@archcollie5708 looks like you know your maths

And yet electricity prices are still increasing!! SA has the 2nd highest renewables uptake but has the most expensive power prices in Australia.

There's no such thing as clean energy.