Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

TODAY. I would rather have tough-guy macho men, than slimy sweet-talk hypocrites

Well, I’m thinking about the big military leaders, like Austin Lloyd, the USA’s Defense Secretary. He’s no wimp . For one thing – he looks the part – he’s a big tough guy in an imposing uniform. He got lotsa medals for bravery in the invasion of Iraq . A four-star general, he was the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Then he left the military to join the weapons-making firm Raytheon. Lloyd is a strong supporter of Israel, and of Saudi Arabia. He ordered air strikes against Syria. He’s ready to wage war against Iran, when that time is “needed”. Lloyd has declared “America’s commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad. It is not negotiable. And it never will be.”

So – nobody can accuse Lloyd of weakness, of cowardice. We know where he stands – ready to lead the USA into its next war.

And as for the war in Ukraine – Austin has been an allout supporter of Ukraine, and devout American hater of Russia. BUT, he is opposed to the plan to supply Ukraine with long range attack missiles to send deep into Russia. He doesn’t see any military reason for this drastic step that would really provoke Putin. Previously, Austin rejected a plan for a no-fly zone over Ukraine. He saw it as not militarily useful and “to enforce that no-fly zone, you’ll have to engage Russian aircraft. And again, that would put us at war with Russia.”

There’s the clue – a “military reason”. Austin doesn’t mind war. It’s his business. But he’s not keen on unnecessary actions that are not useful militarily, but could bring chaos upon us. We know to be wary of belligerents like Austin, but at least there’s a certain logic in his actions.

Then we come to The case of the good-looking slim and silver-haired Antony Blinken in his lovely suits, (and he even plays the guitar). Here we have the ultimate in what a diplomat should be – well-spoken, charming, calming – just what you need for peaceful communication between nations?

Blinken struts the world stage, making motherhood statements about protecting civilians, promoting peace, human rights, and harmony – and sounding so good! All this lovely talk is a cover-up for what he is really supporting – American military hawkishness and Zionist genocide.

Blinken has consistently promoted US military interventions. During the Obama administration, Blinken pushed strongly for  the overthrow of Libyan president Muammar al-Gaddafi. In the years before he became Secretary of State, Blinken co-founded and worked for the secretive WestExec Advisors firm, which lobbied the Pentagon on behalf of weapons-making companies.

In  Blinken’s Senate confirmation hearing, he affirmed that he would be belligerent towards China and Venezuela. Even while he publicly supported U.S. policy for reviving a deal with Iran, he made belligerent statements against Iran.

And that is the typical Blinken way – say one thing, while promoting the opposite in action.

Blinken supports the plan for long-range missiles to be supplied to Ukraine – according to reports in the Guardian and the New York Times.

Not that I’m a fan of Lloyd Austin. Indeed, just like Blinken, Austin has made $millions from his work for weapons industries. As of October 2020, his Raytheon stock holdings were worth roughly $500,000 and his compensation, including stock, totaled $2.7 million. He was a partner in another weapons investment company Pine Island Capital, in which Antony Blinken is, or was, also involved.

Finally – my point is – I worry about the smarmy types like Antony Blinken. He is the epitome of the liars and hypocrites who cover up for governments. Ever in the media, Blinken lulls the world, including Americans, into the belief that America wants peace, that zealots like Zelensky and Netanyahu are right, that somehow – don’t worry – all will be well.

But ,worse than Lloyd Austin, Blinken doesn’t even grasp the military realities. At least Lloyd Austin doesn’t want to plunge us into World War 3 for the sake of a pointless military exercise like letting Ukraine send long range missiles to Moscow.

September 28, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Memo to Dutton: It’s the final quarter, you’d better start kicking

David Crowe, Chief political correspondent, September 26, 2024

The game plan that turned Anthony Albanese from an opposition leader to a prime minister is known by a simple phrase he used for three years before he gained the top job. “I said that we had a plan: kick with the wind in the fourth quarter, outline our policies close to the election,” he said in the weeks after Labor took power.

Albanese tends not to use the phrase these days. No prime minister can tell voters they will only bother with big policies when the election comes. That is true even if it is a plain fact that Labor is working on new measures for the campaign ahead – and that changes to negative gearing may end up in the surprise package.

Peter Dutton, by contrast, lives the Albanese motto every single day. The opposition leader is holding back on every policy that would normally shape an Australian election: on the economy, the cost of living, housing and defence.

Even the glaring exception to that statement – his proposal for seven nuclear power stations – confirms the flimsiness of the Liberal policy platform. Dutton and his energy spokesman, Ted O’Brien, are incredibly coy about how this policy might work. What would it cost? How long would it take? What replaces our ageing coal-fired power stations while we wait for nuclear?

“We will release our costings in due course – at a time of our choosing,” Dutton said in a speech to a business audience on Monday. Sure, it is common for opposition leaders to reveal their full costings shortly before the election. But they tend to put their big-picture policies on the agenda well before that final stage.

Dutton is running out of time. He is acting as if the last phase of this term of parliament is still months away. In fact, the final quarter is already upon us. It started last month, assuming the election is as late as May. And Dutton is yet to prove he can kick when it counts.

Liberals make a fair point about how to judge their policies: they may not have that many, but the ones they have are big and bold. This is absolutely true of the nuclear policy. No matter how many voters were alarmed at the Labor plans for negative gearing in 2019, the prospect of a nuclear accident may frighten a few more. It is a big idea and a huge political risk.

Dutton has leapt ahead of Albanese on a few fronts. He called in May last year for a ban on advertising sports betting during game broadcasts – an idea on which federal cabinet is yet to decide. He backed an age ban on social media earlier this year, months before Labor, thanks to early work by Coalition communications spokesman David Coleman…………………………………………………………………………..

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Dutton has the wind behind him in the opinion polls but looks reluctant to risk this good fortune by telling Australians what he would do with power. ……………………………………….

There is very little pressure on Dutton to move any faster because he has a disciplined frontbench and party room that waits for him to make the big calls on policy timing, as well as a supportive conservative media that tells him he is outsmarting Albanese at every turn. He avoids press conferences in Parliament House, so the press gallery gets relatively few opportunities to question him. He has a narrow list of preferred TV and radio spots. The media strategy spares him any exposure to long interviews that might test him on what he would do if he was running the country.

………………….. This is not proof that voters are buying what Dutton is selling, they say. After all, nobody is sure what he is selling just yet.

The Labor tacticians could be totally wrong, but the Liberals are certainly taking their time. If Dutton wants to kick with the wind in the final quarter, he will need to run a little faster.  https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/memo-to-dutton-it-s-the-final-quarter-you-d-better-start-kicking-20240926-p5kdn5.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawFi2ChleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHeggdYlx-0-WJO5vDD_9NYYsmgvm4WRwBII811EpOipDFB_gAdNsefsDnA_aem_h6jj8XixlRUr13A9QS0T-Q

September 28, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Renewable and Energy storage jobs will soon overtake those in coal and gas

ReNewEconomy Jay Rutovitz, Chris Briggs & Eleanor Gerrard, Sep 26, 2024

The electricity workforce will need to double in five years to achieve Australia’s 2030 renewable energy target, our new report finds. More than 80% of these jobs will be in renewables. Jobs in energy storage alone will overtake domestic coal and gas jobs (not including the coal and gas export sector) in the next couple of years.

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) updates its Integrated System Plan every two years. It’s a blueprint for the energy transition from coal to renewable energy. The plan lays out scenarios for how the electricity system might change to help put in place all the elements needed to make the transition happen.

AEMO and the RACE for 2030 co-operative research centre commissioned the Institute for Sustainable Futures to undertake modelling on the workforce needed for this transition. The “step change” scenario in the Integrated System Plan is broadly aligned with the 2030 renewables target. Under this scenario, we found the electricity workforce would need to grow from 33,000 to peak at 66,000 by 2029.

Rooftop solar and batteries together are projected to account for over 40% of these jobs. Wind farms will employ around one-third and solar farms just under 10%. Jobs would also treble in transmission line construction to connect renewables in regional areas to cities and other states in the next few years.

Job growth would surge in a ‘renewable energy superpower’

In the “green energy export” scenario, Australia becomes a “renewable energy superpower”. The country uses renewable energy to export green hydrogen and power heavy industry. In this scenario, the electricity workforce would almost treble to 96,000 by the late 2020s.

By 2033, after construction peaks, more than half of electricity sector jobs will be in operations and maintenance. This applies to both the step change and green energy export scenarios………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
https://reneweconomy.com.au/energy-storage-jobs-will-soon-overtake-those-in-coal-and-gas/

September 28, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Stuck on repeat: why Peter Dutton’s ‘greatest hits’ on nuclear power are worse than a broken record.

Guardian, Graham Readfearn, 26 Sept 24

So far there are no costings and no details on what type of reactors there would be, their size or who would build them.

Usually you need a few genuine releases under your belt before you start putting out “greatest hits” albums, but when it comes to spruiking nuclear this hasn’t stopped Peter Dutton.

This week, the opposition leader gave a speech that some hoped – perhaps naively – would add some more detail to the Coalition’s scant policy proposal to build nuclear reactors at seven sites around Australia.

But instead, Dutton delivered a familiar run-down of “greatest hits”; nuclear will mean cheap power, everyone else is going nuclear (so why shouldn’t we?), and renewables are unreliable (did you know, for example, and I bet you didn’t, that “solar panels don’t work at night” or that “turbines don’t turn on their own”?).

Perhaps Dutton is banking on the illusory truth effect where, regardless of the truthfulness of a statement, the more people hear it the more they’re inclined to accept it.

So far there are no costings, no details on what type of reactors or how large they will be, or who will build them. We do know Dutton wants to fund them through the taxpayer.

But let’s run through the track listing.

Renewables-only redux

Take, for example, Dutton’s claim in his speech, at the Centre for Economic Development Australia in Sydney, that Labor is pursuing a “renewables-only” policy for the electricity grid – a phrase he repeated seven times.

Just as it has been for many months, the “renewables-only” claim is false.

While it’s true Labor does want the electricity grid dominated by solar and wind, backed up by storage such as batteries and pumped hydro, the current plan also includes gas-fired power that would act as back-up if solar or wind levels dropped too low…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….


28,000km – again

Also getting another go on the turntable was Dutton’s claim the government’s plan would require “28,000km of new transmission lines”.

The actual figure, according to AEMO, is 10,000km – or about a third of Dutton’s claim.

Only under a scenario where Australia gets very aggressive on green energy exports, such as hydrogen, does AEMO think you might need another 10,000km or more of transmission lines.

This has been pointed out before, but, like a broken record, Dutton continues to repeat it.

The nuclear train?

In a statement that will surprise nobody, Dutton said even if the various state and federal bans on nuclear power generation were lifted “we can’t switch nuclear power on tomorrow”.

“But what we can do is ensure that Australia doesn’t miss the nuclear train,” he said.

An independent report on the status of that global “nuclear train” was published last week.

The 500-page World Nuclear Industry Status report said in 2023 a record US$623bn was invested into non-hydro renewable energy, which was “27 times the reported global investment decisions for the construction of nuclear power plants”.

As of July, the report said there were 59 reactors under construction, 10 fewer than a decade ago, with almost half being built in China. Some 23 of those reactors were behind schedule………………………… more https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2024/sep/26/stuck-on-repeat-why-peter-dutton-greatest-hits-on-nuclear-power-are-worse-than-a-broken-record

September 27, 2024 Posted by | politics, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Dutton’s nuclear plan would mean propping up coal for at least 12 more years – and we don’t know what it would cost

Alison Reeve, Deputy Program Director, Energy and Climate Change, Grattan Institute, 25 Sept 24, https://theconversation.com/duttons-nuclear-plan-would-mean-propping-up-coal-for-at-least-12-more-years-and-we-dont-know-what-it-would-cost-239720

Opposition leader Peter Dutton has revealed the Coalition’s nuclear energy plan relies on many of Australia’s coal-fired power stations running for at least another 12 years – far beyond the time frame officials expect the ageing facilities to last.

The claim has set off a new round of speculation over the Coalition’s plans – the viability of which has already been widely questioned by energy analysts.

Dutton offered up limited detail in a speech on Monday. He also revealed the plan relies on ramping up Australia’s gas production.

It seems increasingly clear the Coalition’s nuclear policy would prolong Australia’s reliance on coal, at a time when the world is rapidly moving to cleaner sources of power.

Coal: old and tired

The Coalition wants to build nuclear reactors on the sites of closed coal plants. It says the first reactors could come online by the mid-2030s. However, independent analysis shows the earliest they could be built is the 2040s.

Now it appears the Coalition’s plan involves relying on coal to provide electricity while nuclear reactors are being built. On Monday, Dutton suggested coal-fired electricity would be available into the 2030s and ‘40s.

But this is an overly optimistic reading of coal’s trajectory. The Australian Energy Market Operator says 90% of coal-fired power in the National Electricity Market will close by 2035.

All this suggests the Coalition plans to extend the life of existing coal plants. But this is likely to cost money. Australia’s coal-fired power stations are old and unreliable – that’s why their owners want to shut them down. To keep plants open means potentially operating them at a loss, while having to invest in repairs and upgrades.

This is why coal plant owners sought, and received, payments from state governments to delay exits when the renewables rollout began falling behind schedule.

So who would wear the cost of delaying coal’s retirement? It might be energy consumers if state governments decide to recoup the costs via electricity bills. Or it could be taxpayers, through higher taxes, reduced services or increased government borrowing. In other words, we will all have to pay, just from different parts of our personal budgets.

Labor’s energy plan also relies on continued use of coal. Dutton pointed to moves by the New South Wales and Victorian governments to extend the life of coal assets in those states. For example, the NSW Labor government struck a deal with Origin to keep the Eraring coal station open for an extra two years, to 2027.

However, this is a temporary measure to keep the electricity system reliable because the renewables build is behind schedule. It is not a defining feature of the plan.

New transmission is essential under either plan

Dutton claims Labor’s renewable energy transition will require a massive upgrade to transmission infrastructure. The transmission network largely involves high-voltage lines and towers, and transformers.

He claims the Coalition can circumvent this cost by building nuclear power plants on seven sites of old coal-fired power stations, and thus use existing transmission infrastructure.

Labor’s shift to renewable energy does require new transmission infrastructure, to get electricity from far-flung wind and solar farms to towns and cities. It’s also true that building nuclear power stations at the site of former coal plants would, in theory, make use of existing transmission lines, although the owners of some of these sites have firmly declined the opportunity.

But even if the Coalition’s nuclear plan became a reality, new transmission infrastructure would be needed.

Australia’s electricity demand is set to surge in coming decades as we move to electrify our homes, transport and heavy industry. This will require upgrades to transmission infrastructure, because it will have to carry more electricity. Many areas of the network are already at capacity.

So in reality, both Labor’s and the Coalition’s policies are likely to require substantial spending on transmission.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Climate Change Authority head Matt Kean contradicts Peter Dutton’s claim on nuclear and renewables working together

ABC News, By 7.30 chief political correspondent Laura Tingle

The head of the Climate Change Authority has contradicted the claim of Opposition Leader Peter Dutton that renewables and nuclear power can be ‘companions not competitors’, a claim that suggests a commitment to nuclear power will not derail the current transition to renewable energy.

Matt Kean is a former NSW Liberal energy minister and Treasurer, appointed by the Albanese government to chair the Climate Change Authority (CCA) earlier this year.

The Authority is due to make a recommendation to the government next month on what Australia’s 2035 emissions reduction target would be.

Mr Kean committed to making that target public.

On Monday, Mr Dutton spelt out some of his arguments in favour of nuclear energy, though he continues to decline to outline its cost.

The Opposition leader conceded on Monday that the upfront costs would be substantial but would ultimately prove cheaper than the cost of a transition to renewables, which he said was up to $1.5 trillion, partly because of the need to rewire the electricity system.

However, Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen has repeatedly quoted “the best guide to the cost” of the transition scheme being overseen by Labor was the Australian Energy Market Operator’s “integrated systems plan”, which he said “looked at the total cost out to 2050 of the entire generation, storage and transmission and came up at $121 billion”.

Asked on 7.30 whether nuclear had a role to play in Australia’s best energy mix, Mr Kean said that in the CCA’s recent review of pathways to net zero, “the CSIRO clearly set out the pathway to transition our electricity system and meet our commitments, international and domestic commitments, was renewables that are firmed up with technologies like batteries and storage.”

“That’s the pathway that’s been set out by the CSIRO that’s backed up by the Australian Energy Market Operator,” Mr Kean said…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-23/matt-kean-expert-advice-differs-peter-dutton-nuclear-plan/104386552?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other&fbclid=IwY2xjawFgNZBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHd_YcXBdgR0x85pH_9LerLMxZMbM4Pcqj1mtf4s4-_JFiJSf218SwO5KUg_aem_Zu8m5MVQhLz_j1FEJkC4PQ

September 27, 2024 Posted by | climate change - global warming | Leave a comment

Pro-nuke spin has a $377 billion price tag of government funding

The Fifth Estate, Murray Hogarth, 26 September 2024

THE NUCLEAR FILES: Regional Australia being targeted for nuclear reactors may be in for way more reactors than they might have bargained for. Murray Hogarth finds the nuclear sales pitch to these communities is more revealing than the political spin, and sometimes they reveal more than our politicians do.

Pro-nuke advocates influencing the Liberal-National Coalition want Australia headed for a major nuclear energy power that’s much bigger than first revealed.

A lot more. In total, more than 30 large scale nuclear power stations!

At projected costs of around $377 billion, taking more than 29 years to build through to 2060 at the rate of $13 billion a year.

This would mean producing up to six times more nuclear generation capacity, as most people think the Coalition is currently proposing with its highly controversial energy and climate approach, with more than four times the number of reactors.

Except, what is the Coalition actually proposing? Do we really have any idea? Could there be a big surprise in store?

The total number of individual reactors proposed to be built with government funding and details of what its sketchy nuclear energy plans will cost remains a mystery, even though opposition leader Peter Dutton spoke on the issues a Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA) business lunch in Sydney on Monday.

There are gaping holes in its nuclear ambition story that many critics denounce as an economic fantasy, a deliberate dead cat on the table distraction, a political hoax, an anti-renewables ruse, and a trojan horse aimed at propping up fossil fuels.

A “big nuclear” future?

Just last week, a major regional community was being wooed to support nuclear energy, based on transcripts from a public event shared with The Fifth Estate, with local people invited to join a very “big nuclear” future.

The invitation came from Robert Parker, founder of Nuclear for Climate Australia, who became a cause celebre for the nuclear lobby earlier this year when Engineers Australia cancelled a nuclear-themed lecture that he was scheduled to give, allegedly because of politicised content.

In the resulting furore, fanned by conservative media, the actively pro-nuclear, coalition-aligned right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) rallied to Parker’s defence and provided him with an alternative platform.

Last week, Parker argued that Australia should have 36.8 gigawatts of nuclear generation by 2060, which implies 30 or more largescale reactors or many more small modular reactors (SMRs).

This will sound like an incredibly optimistic ambition to many, given nuclear energy currently remains banned in Australia and the recent international history of massive delays and cost blowouts on nuclear power station projects. But it’s a future which Parker claims is realistic because:

Canadians, they built 18 reactors in 20 years. The French built 58 reactors in 22 years and put 63 gigawatts on to the grid. Here we’re talking around about 36.8 gigawatts. So it’s a lot less than the French did.

Parker claimed it would cost $13 billion a year for 29 years of construction through to 2060, which implies work starting circa 2031 and a total cost of $377 billion.

Exactly like the Coalition, he forecasted the first 600 megawatts (MW) to be built by 2035, which would be two SMRs at 300MW apiece.

But there was a catch. When pressed by audience members about when this nuclear plan would deliver carbon emission reduction benefits, he admitted that it would be 2060 because we’d be “starting far too late”, which also is too late for net zero by 2050

Is this a dress rehearsal for the coalition’s real agenda?

Parker’s plan begs the question of whether this is the Coalition plan, or at least close to it, being live-tested with a real audience…………………………………………………………………. https://thefifthestate.com.au/columns/columns-columns/the-nuclear-files/pro-nuke-spin-has-a-377-billion-price-tag-of-government-funding/

September 27, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear Costs ‘In Due Course’

southburnett.com.au, September 26, 2024

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s long-awaited “nuclear” speech to an economic think tank has admitted the Coalition’s energy plan – which would see seven nuclear plants built if it wins power at next year’s Federal Election – would have a “significant upfront cost”.

But he did not say what this expected cost would be.

“We will release our costings in due course – at a time of our choosing,” Mr Dutton told the Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA) audience gathered on Monday in Sydney (see the full text of Mr Dutton’s speech, below).

Mr Dutton was joined at the event by journalist Chris Uhlmann, from Sky News.

The Opposition Leader said that by positioning the nuclear plants at the site of existing coal-fired power stations, “a whole new and vast transmission network and infrastructure won’t be needed”.

He said the upfront cost would be spread over the reactors’ expected 80-year lifespans and promised “thousands of jobs” would be created by “zero emission” nuclear energy.

And objections to a civil nuclear industry on the grounds of safety and waste disposal were “inconsistent and illogical” due to the AUKUS plan for nuclear-powered submarines.

In June this year, the Coalition proposed seven sites to house nuclear power generators: Tarong and Callide in Queensland, Mt Piper (Lithgow) and Liddell in NSW, Loy Yang in Victoria, Muja (Collie) in Western Australia and Port Augusta in South Australia.

Critics of the Coalition’s energy plan stated this week that electricity prices would have to rise for nuclear power plants to be commercially viable without government subsidies.

A report released by the Institute For Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) said Australian household power bills would be likely to rise by $665 per year based on an analysis of the construction cost of nuclear reactor projects committed to construction over the past 20 years in the European Union and North America.

The report also considered tender contract prices submitted for small modular reactor and Korean reactor designs.

“Our research found that all projects commencing construction in the past 20 years in in the US and Europe experienced major budget blowouts up to three-and-a-half times original capital costs, as well as construction delays of many years,” IEEFA spokesperson Johanna Bowyer said.

“Small modular reactors (SMRs), which are often cited as a solution to resolve the nuclear industry’s cost and construction time problem, remain costly and unproven, with no reactors in operation in the OECD. The reactor closest to becoming a reality, NuScale, was cancelled due to cost blowouts.”

………………………………………………………………………………………………………Nationals Leader David Littleproud  described the nuclear plants as “plug and play” … “you don’t need as much transmission lines, it’s plug and play, exactly where they are”.  https://southburnett.com.au/news2/2024/09/26/nuclear-costs-in-due-course/

September 26, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Assange to Testify at Council of Europe

The freed publisher will appear in person in Strasbourg on Oct. 1 to address the Council of Europe, WikiLeaks said today.

September 24, 2024, By Joe Lauria, Consortium News

WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, who was released from prison in June, will address the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France on Oct. 1 after he was granted  Status as a Political Prisoner by a rapporteur of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), WikiLeaks said today.

It will be the first time Assange will speak in public since his hearing in U.S. federal court on the North Mariana islands in June, at which he was granted his release after a plea deal.

Assange will give evidence before the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), which will meet from 8.30am to 10am at the Palace of Europe, WikiLeaks said.

It follows the PACE inquiry report into Assange’s case, written by Rapporteur Thórhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir.

“The report focuses on the implications of his detention and its broader effects on human rights, in particular freedom of journalism,” WikiLeaks said in a press release published on X. “The report confirms that Assange qualifies as a political prisoner and calls on the UK [to] conduct an independent review into whether he was exposed to inhuman or degrading treatment.”

Ævarsdóttir called Assange’s case a “high profile example of transnational repression.” Her report “discusses how governments employ both legal and extralegal measures to suppress dissent across borders, which poses significant threats to press freedom and human rights,” said WikiLeaks.

Still Recovering

Assange is “still in recovery following his release from prison,” it said. He will travel to France because of “the exceptional nature of the invitation and to embrace the support received from PACE and its delegates over the past years”………………………………………………………. more https://consortiumnews.com/2024/09/24/assange-to-testify-at-council-of-europe/

September 26, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australians are installing batteries at a record rate, as rooftop solar heads for major new milestone.

ReNewEconomy, Sophie Vorrath, Sep 25, 2024

Australia is hurtling towards a major new milestone of 25 gigawatts (GW) total installed rooftop solar capacity, and adding behind-the-meter batteries to the mix at a record rate, as households and businesses continue their march to cheaper bills and energy independence.

The Clean Energy Council’s bi-annual Rooftop Solar and Storage Report for the first half of 2024, published on Wednesday, puts the cumulative total of panels installed on rooftops around the country at 24.4 GW, well on track to passing the 25 GW mark by the end of the year.

This is now clearly more than the remaining total combined power generating capacity of black and brown coal-fired power stations in the country, which stood at 21.3 GW in the financial year to 2023-24.

According to the CEC report, put together using data provided by solar consultancy SunWiz, nearly 30,000 battery sales were recorded in the first half of 2024, taking the cumulative total past 140,000 and pushing the rolling 12-month quarterly average of battery sales to a record of 14,555.

The data shows 20.7 per cent of rooftop solar installations had an accompanying small-scale battery in the first half of 2024, while the attachment rate of batteries connected to solar households reached a high of 19% – a 5% increase on the same time a year ago…………………………………………………..

CEC modelling showed households could achieve annual bill savings of between $900 and $1000 a year with non-orchestrated batteries and between $1150 and 1500 per year with orchestrated batteries trading energy with the grid.

More batteries are also expected to deliver benefits to those who cannot access home solar and storage, as they drive down energy costs and deliver other benefits to the grid.

“It is a win-win outcome,” says Hristadoulidis. “In the midst of a slower economy, solar PV and home batteries can play a key role is lifting economic activity by support for thousands of Australian installers and businesses working in the sector, as well as lowering energy bills for all Australians.”

Other highlights from the CEC report come from the state-by-state rooftop PV tally, which sees New South Wales maintain its long-time domination of the rankings, with another 454 MW of new rooftop PV installed in the first half of 2024.

This makes NSW the second state to pass one million total rooftop PV installations – Queensland did this last year – and takes its cumulative installed capacity to an impressive 6.6GW; the highest of any state and more than a quarter of the national capacity.

In second and third place are Queensland, with 360MW added in the first half of 2024, and Victoria, where 246MW was added.

Rooftop solar system sizes, meanwhile, keep getting bigger, as households start to electrify everything – including their trannsport.

The data shows the growth in the average system size in the first half of 2024 grew slightly to 9.7 kW, a new bi-annual record and a far cry from 10 years ago, when the average system size was 4.3 kW. https://reneweconomy.com.au/australians-are-installing-batteries-at-a-record-rate-as-rooftop-solar-heads-for-major-new-milestone/

September 26, 2024 Posted by | energy | Leave a comment

Australia Abstains | Scam of the Week

September 25, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Households surge ahead in rooftop solar as renewable projects break bottleneck

By Caitlin Fitzsimmons, September 25, 2024,  https://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/households-surge-ahead-in-rooftop-solar-as-renewable-projects-break-bottleneck-20240924-p5kd2t.html

Consumers are leading the national transition to renewable energy, installing four times more electricity generation through rooftop solar in the first half of this year than all the commercial projects combined.

Households added 1.3 gigawatts (1300 megawatts) of power capacity to the national electricity grid through 141,364 new rooftop solar installations in the first six months of 2024, a Clean Energy Council report says, while only 310 megawatts of commissioned large-scale generation projects came online during the same period.

SunWiz managing director Warwick Johnston said large-scale solar and wind projects were large investment decisions facing “headwinds” in the planning system, and these same barriers were not there for rooftop solar.

“You’re looking at lots of people making very comparatively small investment decisions on the basis of really just their personal situation,” Johnston said.

“It’s a lot easier to get a permit to connect your solar to the grid, and you don’t need environmental studies or any of those sorts of things when you’re just putting solar on your own roof.”

However, a significant amount of large-scale renewable energy is in the pipeline, and new figures from the Clean Energy Regulator suggest projects are finally passing the bottleneck of approvals.

The Clean Energy Council report, using SunWiz figures for rooftop solar, says NSW became the second state behind Queensland to surpass one million rooftop solar installations, adding 454 megawatts of extra capacity.

Clean Energy Council co-chief policy and impact officer, Con Hristodoulidis, said Australia was a global leader in rooftop solar, in part because of good policy with consumer incentives from both the Commonwealth and state governments for about 12 years.

“The beauty of Australia is we’ve got a high proportion of [freestanding] housing … so the ability for people to put solar on their roof has been a lot easier than some of the other countries that are more apartment-based,” Hristodoulidis said. “And finally, we’ve got some sun.”

The average system size is now 9.7 kilowatts, compared with 7.4 kilowatts five years ago and 4.3 kilowatts a decade ago. Johnston said 20 per cent of solar panel installations in 2023 were upgrades to existing systems.

Australia now has 24.4 gigawatts of installed rooftop solar capacity, compared with 21.3 gigawatts of coal-powered electricity in the 2023-24 financial year.

The report also says about one in five solar installations nationally included a household battery in the first half of the year, adding nearly 30,000 units for a cumulative total of more than 140,000.

Johnston said the uptake of batteries was driven by falling feed-in tariffs, making it more economical to store energy to use later and to ensure an uninterrupted power supply.

“People are sick of sending their solar power out to the grid and only getting a pittance for it, whereas those batteries mean that they can take charge of their own power needs,” Johnston said.

“The other aspect is people seeing increasingly strong weather-related blackouts … and batteries are providing that insurance for their own electricity supply.”

The Victorian government has low-interest loans for household batteries, and NSW has a rebate scheme starting in November. The Clean Energy Council is calling for federal incentives.

The Clean Energy Council figure of 310 megawatts for large-scale renewables counts only generators that started distributing electricity into the grid in the first half of 2024, rather than projects in the approval or construction phase.

The Clean Energy Regulator, in a separate report, said it approved 1.4 gigawatts of large-scale renewable generation in the first half of 2024 and 2.5 gigawatts of applications were awaiting assessment at the mid-point of the year.

The regulator also reported that 1.8 gigawatts of large-scale renewable capacity reached the “financial investment decision” stage in the first half, which means the proponent has committed financial resources and is ready to build.

Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen said the figures showed the government’s renewables plan was “on track and building momentum”.

September 25, 2024 Posted by | energy | Leave a comment

Dutton’s baseload nuclear plan shows he does not understand energy systems, Bowen says.


Giles Parkinson, 24 Sept 24 https://reneweconomy.com.au/duttons-baseload-nuclear-plan-shows-he-does-not-understand-energy-systems-bowen-says/

Federal energy minister Chris Bowen has accused Coalition leader Peter Dutton and his fellow nuclear spruikers of failing to understand the changing dynamics of the Australian energy system.

Bowen’s remarks follow reports warning of potential blackouts and price spikes should the Coalition pursue its plan for extending the life of Australia’s ageing coal fleet while waiting for nuclear to be built, and comes a day after Dutton refused to reveal his nuclear costings in what was supposed to be a keynote speech in Sydney.

Instead, Dutton continued his attack on Labor’s reliance on wind and solar, saying it would result in the lights going out, soaring prices, and a stalled economy.

The focus of the debate seems to revolve around the construct of baseload power, which the Australian Energy Market Operator said this week, and big utilities agree, is being made redundant by the emerging dominance of wind and solar, and rooftop PV in particular, backed up by storage and other flexible generation.

Most in the energy industry argue that nuclear, which relies on being “always on” and has limited ability to ramp up and down, simply doesn’t fit into a grid with a majority wind and solar. The nuclear industry itself admits as much.

Dutton on Monday said renewables and nuclear could co-exist, but the four grids he cited – Arizona, France, Finland and Ontario – have no more than 18 per cent renewable share. Australia is at 40 per cent, going on 50 per cent with already committed projects, and is aiming for 82 per cent by 2030.

“The thing about Peter Dutton’s plan is again he doesn’t understand that what we need for a system which is net zero and predominantly renewable with peaking and firming,” Bowen said in an interview on Radio National breakfast.

“Coal is not suitable for peaking and firming, because once you turn a coal‑fired power station on, you’re not turning it off, and guess what, same as nuclear.

“Whereas gas can be turned on and off to support the energy system when we do need more energy, it can be turned on or off at two minutes’ notice, so when a gas‑fired power station is not turned on, it is zero emissions.

“Coal and nuclear can’t be turned on and off, and when coal is on it is emitting even if we don’t need the energy. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the energy system.”

Dutton and conservative voices have said that Bowen’s 82 per cent renewables target is impossible to meet, and will destroy industry. They argue that no grid can survive on such a high level of renewables, despite South Australia already doing so, and the market operator also convinced it can and will be done.

“Getting to 82 per cent renewables is no small thing, it’s a big change for the country,” Bowen said.

“But it’s also got to be supported by a well‑detailed plan to back it by new storage, batteries primarily, but also pumped hydro. That’s happening, and we have policies in place to do that, and that is rolling out; we’re seeing a big increase in storage.”

The Clean Energy Regulator on Tuesday released a report which showed that 7 GW of new wind and solar, including 4 GW of large scale renewables, should be committed this year, an improvement on previous years although still short of the level required.

Former NSW Coalition energy minister and now chair of the Climate Change Authority Matt Kean was also critical of Dutton’s assertions that nuclear makes a good bedfellow for renewables.

“I think the advice from the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator is very different,” he told ABC TV’s 7.30 program.


“We know that nuclear technology is not flexible to work with renewables, so therefore it isn’t the best technology to support renewables.

“We also know that it will take a long time to build nuclear capacity. Australia doesn’t have a nuclear industry. We don’t have the workforce that’s ever done this before, and the best example to look to is what’s happening in the UK, another democracy that’s currently building a nuclear power plant.”

He pointed to the Hinckley C reactor that has been delayed more than a decade, and where costs have blown out to more than $A86 billion as an example.

“AEMO and the CSIRO have said clearly that the cheapest way to replace our existing capacity is renewables that are backed up by firming technologies,” Kean said.

“We’ll take the advice of the experts. We’re not going to get into ideology. This should be about evidence, science, engineering and economics.”

September 24, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Dutton’s truth-sounding nuclear power arguments are for generating impressions, not information.

He didn’t mention having to keep coal in the mix for a lot longer. But that’s certainly what his Coalition partners, the Nationals, have been saying with a nudge and a wink, whenever they are in receptive company.

Karen Middleton, 24 Sept 24,  https://www.theguardian.com/global/2024/sep/24/peter-dutton-ceda-speech-coalition-nuclear-power-plan-costs

The opposition leader keeps bypassing questions over the cost of his energy plan – while leaning on little more than fuzzy assurances.

It was nothing if not audacious.

In a speech that avoided answering one of the biggest questions hanging over his policy to build nuclear reactors at seven sites around Australia, Peter Dutton posed a very similar one about his opponents and their plans to phase out fossil fuels.

“Who will bear the costs of this transition?” Dutton asked in an address to the Committee for Economic Development of Australia on Monday, before answering it himself. “Australian households will – in their power bills.”

Dutton’s speech to a lunchtime event titled “A nuclear-powered Australia – could it work?” contained no new information about his nuclear plan and was instead an exercise in relativism via admission. To paraphrase: my energy policy might cost a lot, but theirs will cost more and mine is more reliable.

“Yes, our nuclear plan does have significant upfront cost,” Dutton said. “… But a whole new and vast transmission network and infrastructure won’t be needed.”

He has still provided no evidence to support this statement, nor any further detail beyond naming seven sites and indicating he favours small modular reactors.

This speech was not about providing that detail. It was about making truthy-sounding arguments designed to generate an impression, not information.

He had a few messages that clearly came straight from the focus groups, starting and ending on a plea for “pragmatism, not politics”, rebuking the Albanese government for being “juvenile” and “childish” and accusing it of avoiding “a sensible discussion” about nuclear power.

What is evident from Dutton’s speech is that he knows, as the government does, that it won’t be arguments about three-eyed fish or even earthquake fault lines that will swing voters for or against nuclear power as they think about which way to vote. It’s what it will cost and whether nuclear can actually address Australia’s energy challenges.

Dutton was cosying up to renewable energy, suggesting he’s all for it, but that it needs more grunt to get Australia through. He’s trying to suggest his policy is about climate responsibility, not denial, and balances environmental and economic imperatives.

“We can have cheaper, cleaner and consistent energy if we adopt nuclear power,” he said. “And zero-emission nuclear power is our only chance to reach net zero by 2050.”

He didn’t mention having to keep coal in the mix for a lot longer. But that’s certainly what his Coalition partners, the Nationals, have been saying with a nudge and a wink, whenever they are in receptive company.

Referring to the government’s policy, Dutton used the false label “renewables-only” seven times and “renewables alone” once. He suggested that the government’s pledge to an ongoing role for gas was support in name only. Tell that to the Labor party members and constituents who are outraged that its future gas strategy embeds that particular fossil fuel in the energy mix to 2050 and beyond.

The opposition leader said Labor was lying about the “true costs” Australians would bear in its planned transition away from coal-fired power to cleaner forms of energy, calling this an “absolute scandal” while saying precisely nothing specific about the cost of his own.

“We will release our costings in due course, at a time of our choosing,” Dutton said.

Calling his own policy idea “truly visionary” was the closest he came to acknowledging that nuclear power could not be up and running in Australia for at least two decades.

“We can’t switch nuclear power on tomorrow,” he said, adding one more little caveat about legislative obstacles. “Even if the ban is lifted.”

Not when, if.

Instead of cold, hard facts, Dutton’s Ceda speech relied on warm, fuzzy assurances. With the emphasis on fuzzy.

“Clean nuclear energy is reliable,” he insisted. “It will underpin renewables. It will get the cost of electricity down. It will keep the lights on.”

In which decade, he didn’t quite say.

September 24, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Australian nuclear news headlines 23- 30 September

Headlines as they come in:

And as coal power makes its way out of the mix, solar continues to grow, with a total installed capacity of 1.3 GW added so far this year – or 141,364 systems – taking the share of rooftop PV in the national electricity mix to 11.3 per cent, as of the end of June.

September 24, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »