The Australian people would expect honest business decisions made by our government, instead , we have politicians making uneducated decisions to suit their personal agenda. This action should carry criminal consequences and action. We need to weed out the ineffective politicians asap
A public official gaining benefit to themselves is actually a crime in australia. But just like the youth crime crisis in queensland and NT the laws not being enforced
Being taxpayer funded, the CSIRO is part of the bureaucracy and as all good bureaucrats know, if you want to remain in business, you have to look after the interests of your paymasters. They will always back the government’s position. They will never contradict it.
They went from pre eminent scientists to Political activists lackeys They were also engaged in the Gain of function research so are complicate in COVID the mongrels
@@rickjohnson2165 This is why the civil service model of countries like the UK and Australia is no longer suitable. The system of staff changeover after elections used by the USA and many countries of Europe, such as France, is now superior since the neutrality of the civil service can no longer be relied on under our system.
You might be experiencing transferrence. I certainly roll my eyes, but speaking to my adult kids who are not uneducated nor rednecks, they really have no idea and no interest in this debate Same with my mother, brothers and sisters, and many workmates.
@@davesmith1553 i was just saying i dont think most people think that way. And thats got nothing to do with the people you mix with. I think you would roll your eyes and i know i do, but yet here we are being shoved down this renewables path. Ifmost people thought that way wed have. A different government and we would still be manufacturing in this country. Yeah could be projection, regardless of the word was the meaning that its a rendancy to think “most people are basically like me”
@@aussieboy77 They get sacked for not 'towing the line' and making their superiors look good. This would include someone wanting to tell the truth on energy pricing.
I would think electric companies would be in a rush to build cheaper renewable generation if cheaper than coal generation. Instead it is the taxpayer having to pay for renewables.
Whilst Australia has international obligations on steady emissions reductions over time, there is still room for coal and gas to play a part in Australia's energy mix. I would argue that to address skyrocketing electricity prices, we should build at least 4 GW of capacity in brownfields sites in NSW and QLD, at locations consistent with lowest cost coal supply. 8-12GW of nuclear capacity should also be on the drawing board. Thisof course means that net zero is no longer achievable, but does anyone really think it is feasible in the first place? Net zero policy exemplifies the folly of the aphorism: perfect is the enemy of good.
Why should Australia honour false paradigms when it's obvious no one else is - the USA, China, the EC (especially Germany). Nobody is honestly lowering Carbon emissions, and thank God they aren't. Average Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere is 0.004%, when it gets down to 0.003% ALL vegetation dies - and all flesh is grass. So isn't that more dangerous - we are what we eat anf if it's all gone so are we.
Renewables have never passed the pub test. They have added more and more renewables into our power grid for the last 40 years and in that period we have gone from having some of the cheapest and most reliable power in the world to having some of the most expensive and least reliable.
@@peterking8564"According to current scientific understanding, *_Earth will likely exist for another 5 billion years before being engulfed by the Sun_* when it enters its red giant phase, meaning the planet itself will last for roughly 9.5 billion years in total, as it is currently estimated to be 4.5 billion years old." (Google AI)
@@andrewnelson3681 lol I think quite clearly they meant before the planet become uninhabitable by humans, not before the Sun grows into a red giant and swallows the Earth 😂
The problem is not which form of electricity generation is the cheapest but which is cheapest to deliver to the customer as required. Renewables fall down badly on both delivery systems, a new massive network of costly transmission lines is required, and timeliness, you need costly backup generators (or humungous batteries) on standby for when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. When you factor in those costs renewables are not the cheapest. Which is why electricity costs are sky-rocketing. Take away the subsidies and the economics collapses.
This is the problem - the corruption of science by money and ideology. These false reports will cost Australia dearly. There needs to be an inquiry into the objectivity of the CSIRO - and universities.
Correct. These people at CSIRO doing Gencost are not stupid, they know exactly what they are doing which makes them all the more culpable. They need to go 😡
Yes and renewables alone is infinitely more expensive that coal or gas or nuclear when the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow. This is just common sense!
I'm sure you have a well organised life young Lady but, We as a country could prosper with you in the Senate. A huge ask but could you please stand. Shame job CSIRO.
thank you - confirmed my own numbers based on Asian energy industry. It is political propaganda, not a proper technical report. I suggest they get a foreign industry body to do it rather than the biased Australia group.
Copied…. So why did the CSIRO decide to exclude a proven energy technology used around the world from their GenCost report which everyone treats as the gold standard in generation technology cost estimates?
Even if the CSIRO's numbers were skewed in favor of political preference, surely it would be worth the extra investment for nuclear. Having our electricity supply self sufficient and reliable over the long term should be considered priceless given what we have seen overseas in recent years.
From start to finish, it is the most environmentally disastrous policy that can be made. From manufacture to disposal, everything it touches turns is destructive.
@@willdsm08 Exactly. Make it make sense. Destroying the environment to "save" the environment. Only a government could come up with such sheer stupidity.
Its tough being a scientist working for gov these days. But the job description kind of requires you to resist the pressures and tell the truth. Politicians are necessarily amatures in a democracy. They must have good advice from the public service, you cannot outsource this to companies. In their turn, politicians need to have enough wisdom to keep their hands off the advisors. Ask hard questions, for sure, but dont threaten or seek to influence the result.
Many years ago I wrote an independent report for NAB. I told the truth and they quickly binned it and terminated my services. Then they then paid another independent consultant to rewrite the report and several other reports. After that experience I never cared for the truth, I just cared for what the one paying the bill wanted to hear.
Thanks CIS, for a fantastic fact check, Politicians especially the labour party will never make factual decisions when it comes to nuclear as it gets in the road of their renewable's agenda, and we can't have that can we.
There are currently 60 new nuclear plants under construction in the world.including design, construction ,running costs and maint and then demolishment Cost of power produced is 2 cents per kwhr.cost of coal/gas is 4 approx per kwhr,cost of solar is about 10 to 14 cents per kwhr.just work out the cost of one panel divided by 20 years, then work out how much power the panel generates.everybody will be horified.comments from a civil engineer.
You didn't include construction and decommission (or replacement even if you use the same site) costs... meh, that just drives the solar and wind further into the stratosphere. Indeed, you could call the cost exorbitant, though I prefer the description of the cost as infinite.
I worked on Mt Piper construction and yes it was designed for 4 units, the plans were based on Bayswater Power Station, which was 4 units, Mt Piper Units were on the plans were called Bayswater units 5,6,7,8, but only units 5 and 6 were built but these are the Mt Piper units of 1 and 2, also no one ever mentions the wide spread rolling 4hr blackout of NSW in the early 1980's due to NSW not having enough power in the grid, as if we are repeating history. I find that CSIRO and the ABC are running the same ideologies
If it’s the cheapest form of energy why does South Australia have the most expensive electricity in the world? Even with all the wind turbines and solar panels, astronomically priced
They are just providing the answers their bosses want. This disease impacts science around the world as the US EPA and even the National Academy of Science in the US play these games. Any questions where activist organizations have an interest, "truth" goes out the window. This phenomenon has infected many environmental science areas.
The Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) is funded by a mix of private donors, corporations, and philanthropic foundations. One foundation that has been historically linked to funding CIS is the Cormack Foundation, a private investment fund associated with the Liberal Party of Australia in Victoria.
It staggers me that as a country that produces 1.4% of the C02 in the world's atmosphere we as a nation are wasting time, resources, energy & effort, our limited finances and our expertise on all these so called Alternatives including nuclear. When we need the cheapest most readily avaialable energy to reshore our manufacturing so we are not held to ransome by large overseas countries that are using coal, building 100's of new coal power stations and stripping our nation of jobs, production, tax base and income. As Dietrich Bonhoffer said, "Stupidy is more intractable than wickedness".
_It staggers me that as a country that produces 1.4% of the C02 in the world's atmosphere_ What matters is per-capita CO2 production. Clearly, that's a step beyond your understanding. Australia emits 15.01 tons/person against the world average of 4.8, placing Australia at no 12 of per-capita emitters. For raw emissions, Australia is no 16, still very much closer to the top than the bottom. Manufacturing is not viable in Australia as Australia has the highest minimum wage in the world. Search it. Australia also has one of the lowest (102 of 145) economic complexity indices in the world, below Nepal, Rwanda, Bangladesh, etc. Search _economic complexity index by country._ That means Australia's national economy is a simple, raw-materials-exporting, third-world economy. Luckily, there's enough raw materials to keep all of us relatively wealthy. But, of course, you know nothing about this. Australia embraces ignorance and celebrates stupidity.
Have you heard of the Paris Agreement and each countries commitment to lower CO2? And yes we should limit coal exports, but I think these are going to drop dramatically in the year ahead as it replaced by cheaper energy alternatives.
PS I err, in fact oil, gas, coal, uranium, sunlight and wind are ALL free actually. It is the cost of getting their end product [power], into your toaster, air conditioner and motor car that determines how expensive and economical, they can be. Coal and particularly brown coal as in Victori is till the cheapest. Surely the CSIRO can come up witha cleaner method and more efficient of producing electricity then our current 1800s designed current power stations???
CIS also make the flawed assumption that recent bid prices when coal set the price represent the cost of new coal. It’s more like that these prices represent the short run marginal cost for coal plants . That is it has no allowances for capital return.
It would be great to have independent analysis from someone like the the Centre for Independent Studies, however it does not publish its funding sources and is widely regarded as having a strong bias to the right side of politics in Australia. This debate over the Gencost is largely pointless anyway, as investors run their own numbers, perform their own risk assessments and have decided not to install new coal plants in Australia for quite some time.
Technology that works and is cost effective doesn't need to be subsidised by the Government. It would be installed purely because it /is/ cost effective. And if that were true, renewables would be powering every remote community in Australia. Instead, it's all diesel generators.
Coal generators are being forced out by an electricity market that is being deliberately manipulated to do just that, all to meet nut zero targets. Australia is stuffed if we can't turn this around soon.
Coal generators are being forced out of an electricity market that is being deliberately manipulated to do precisely that, just to meet nut zero targets and line some grifters pockets. Australia is stuffed if we can't turn this around soon.
its really not hard if renewables really were the "cheapest form of energy" every man and his dog would be fighting over building it, we wouldn't have an energy under supply we would have and over supply.
_How much power would one nuclear power plant generate?_ They come in different sizes. One modular plant is about 300MW. Bill Gates' TerraPower will put out about 345MW which is quickly scalable to about 500MW for over 5 hours--that's enough for 400 homes. It uses the heat from the molten salt to do this. There are many big nuclear power stations around the world putting out about 1GW--the same as a big coal plant. Koeberg's two plants in Africa put out 1.940GW combined. We're far behind in Australia. The two Hinckley C plants will put out 3.2GW combined and are expected to last 60 years.
Pity about the health destroying effluent and the damage merury does to our brains. The water consumption is insane, the cleanup costs huge and often avoided by big coal. The fly ash is also a toxic problem. None of these problems exist with solar and wind.
Two brownfield sites with space beside? The mean of current pricing might be too high as a comparison? Wow these arguments are so compelling. But wait isnt Coal just another fossil fuel? Or has somone worked out that the CSIRO was mistaken or had misrepresented that!
CIS, FIRSTLY Brownfield can be More Expensive than Greenfield. But You are Right Brownfield can be Cheaper than Greenfield. Hence the Truth about which is Cheapest is done on a Case by Case Basis. Plus with Consideration of Background Socio-Economic Environment at the Time of Intended Build. SECONDLY CIS's Coal Cost Estimates for Kogan Creek Assume Stable OIL Prices. It Pays to Remember Coal is Very Very Reliant on OIL. THIRDLY The Insurance Cost of Aussie OIL and COAL is Underwritten by the Federal Government. Hence if COAL had to Pay Market Insurance Rates that Reflect the RISK. COAL Would be Much More Expensive Per Tonne. This Underwriting of COAL, OIL, GAS Risks is Part of the Reason Many Nations, Including Australia, have to Pay REPARATIONS for Global Climate Change Issues.
why the hell is coal so expensive, we have like, all of the coal and it's easily accessible. the mining companies should be supplying our plants for free in return for allowing them to mine in the first place.
I searched for Centre for Liberal Party Policy Studies and first result was you guys!! Same guys paying for your data are the same guys funding the Liberal Party
The CSIRO isn't a scientific organisation anymore. It has become politicalised and now focuses on justifying ideologies with religious verve, with only selective consideration of actual science where absolutely necessary. That's what you get with a couple of decades of politically motivated hiring of the right "scientists" and management, and the dismissal of anyone who disagrees with the "agreed science". The whole ethos of science is not to agree with beliefs, but to pursue the truth as illuminated by the data. Not the truth as enforced by politicians like Bowen.
All this does is push people away from both parties and to a teal, so what do they do? Make it hard for teals to get noticed and call out to what people want to know and policy for
Reports are always subject to garbage in garbage out accusations. The base data and methodology need to be understood first to determine if they are accurate and appropriate for the required purpose. There should be scientific, not public servant or political, review of the findings by qualified scientific experts - none of which happens any more, if ever. It then simply becomes a football match to see who can spin it the best. A disappointing way to treat our children’s future. Just let Adi Paterson and a panel of foreign nuclear experts do the work and present the findings - I may actually pay attention to their conclusions.
Agreed. However, CIS makes no bones about the fact that they are biased, and what their biases are. CSIRO and AEMO claim to be unbiased, and will not reveal their biases, even in the face of a FOI requests. Clearly gotta protect those deep Australian military secrets - about _public_ policy.
@@factnotfiction5915 A strange defense - how are we supposed to debate this matter with lobbyists like this presenting biased analyses? And I don't see anything similar from my side of the "debate". You and I will never agree, but this is just BS. Then you assert that AEMO and CSIRO are biased - I can't accept that. Just because you don't like what GENCOST said, is no reason to libel those organisations (and the staff). I can accede that GENCOST could be flawed, and maybe should be revised, in the light of all the analysis and possibly dubious assumptions, and criticism from your side, but it was a first attempt at such a study. The answer isn't to ignore everything it says. Can you imagine how people are going to react when Ted O'Brien finally releases HIS position paper?
How about telling the truth for once? Does Australia have a national reserve policy? When the ALP implemented a Reserve on GAS (For 12mths) the LNP Media went crazy - How dare you lock in a lower price for Australians to pay! Why is Australia a country so rich in resource but doesn't look after its people? Again, LNP politics at play when Mr Howard allowed the Gas cartel to write their own policy on selling all the GAS overseas, now we sell overseas and buy it back again! All coal burnt, is bought at world Market rate, WHY! You keep complaining about renewable, not sure if you watch the price of South Australian energy prices which is constantly Negative, due to excess Renewable generation. Start doing your own research people from respected sources, not this Rubbish!
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't think it's a flawed analysis I think it's intentionally manipulated
Ya think!?
Blatantly manipulated.
Yes all to fit their agenda
100%
You don't think at all. CIS is a biased Liberal think tank.
So much for the CSIRO being honest and neutral. No faith in them.
The Australian people would expect honest business decisions made by our government, instead , we have politicians making uneducated decisions to suit their personal agenda. This action should carry criminal consequences and action. We need to weed out the ineffective politicians asap
i think your to way easy on these fools
Australia should be the wealthiest nation, period.
As it is we are the world's largest smorgasbord being picked over by corporations!
@@OpinionFactChecker With a number of politicians being the facilitators of the theft.
A public official gaining benefit to themselves is actually a crime in australia.
But just like the youth crime crisis in queensland and NT the laws not being enforced
I stopped taking CSIRO seriously for some years now, once it became obvious they were/are ideologically captured. How the mighty have fallen.
Being taxpayer funded, the CSIRO is part of the bureaucracy and as all good bureaucrats know, if you want to remain in business, you have to look after the interests of your paymasters.
They will always back the government’s position. They will never contradict it.
They went from pre eminent scientists to Political activists lackeys They were also engaged in the Gain of function research so are complicate in COVID the mongrels
Was that about the time Tony Abbott gutted the place?
@@rickjohnson2165 This is why the civil service model of countries like the UK and Australia is no longer suitable. The system of staff changeover after elections used by the USA and many countries of Europe, such as France, is now superior since the neutrality of the civil service can no longer be relied on under our system.
@@dfor50That's internally contradictory. To fix always supporting the government's position you wanna have the government appoint them?
Most Australians with a brain will roll their eyes when hearing "renewables are cheaper" without having to see this excellent analysis.
Unfortunately I see no brains here.
@@andrewmcrystal7768Is that because you're looking in a mirror?
You might be experiencing transferrence. I certainly roll my eyes, but speaking to my adult kids who are not uneducated nor rednecks, they really have no idea and no interest in this debate
Same with my mother, brothers and sisters, and many workmates.
@@davefoord1259 I think you mean projection. Could be that I mix with very different types of people to the ones you mix with.
@@davesmith1553 i was just saying i dont think most people think that way. And thats got nothing to do with the people you mix with.
I think you would roll your eyes and i know i do, but yet here we are being shoved down this renewables path.
Ifmost people thought that way wed have. A different government and we would still be manufacturing in this country.
Yeah could be projection, regardless of the word was the meaning that its a rendancy to think “most people are basically like me”
If I lied in a report I had written, I would expect to lose my job.
They have nt lied. It's just that the LNP and the fossil fuel lobby don't like the answers.
@@peterking8564 And Skynews and "Independent" lobby group.
Government workers rarely get sacked no matter how bad they are.
@@aussieboy77 They get sacked for not 'towing the line' and making their superiors look good. This would include someone wanting to tell the truth on energy pricing.
The energy policies of Albo and 'Blackout' Bowen will drive Australia back to the Stone Age. 😢
Typical communist behavior...
We couldn't get industrialization right. Industrialization must be the problem, not our broken ideas!
Welcome to country
CSIRO have become Australia's "Jaguar".
There's a big club and we're not in it.
The ring-leaders are Andrew Forrest, Malcolm Turnbull, Simon Holmes a Court, and Mike Cannon-Brookes.
I would think electric companies would be in a rush to build cheaper renewable generation if cheaper than coal generation. Instead it is the taxpayer having to pay for renewables.
Not true, coal and gas is more subsidised
Whilst Australia has international obligations on steady emissions reductions over time, there is still room for coal and gas to play a part in Australia's energy mix. I would argue that to address skyrocketing electricity prices, we should build at least 4 GW of capacity in brownfields sites in NSW and QLD, at locations consistent with lowest cost coal supply. 8-12GW of nuclear capacity should also be on the drawing board. Thisof course means that net zero is no longer achievable, but does anyone really think it is feasible in the first place? Net zero policy exemplifies the folly of the aphorism: perfect is the enemy of good.
Why should Australia honour false paradigms when it's obvious no one else is - the USA, China, the EC (especially Germany). Nobody is honestly lowering Carbon emissions, and thank God they aren't. Average Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere is 0.004%, when it gets down to 0.003% ALL vegetation dies - and all flesh is grass. So isn't that more dangerous - we are what we eat anf if it's all gone so are we.
Renewables have never passed the pub test. They have added more and more renewables into our power grid for the last 40 years and in that period we have gone from having some of the cheapest and most reliable power in the world to having some of the most expensive and least reliable.
Australia's coal reserves are estimated to last over 1,000 years based on current extraction rates and production levels
But how long does the planet have if its all burnt?
@@peterking8564"According to current scientific understanding, *_Earth will likely exist for another 5 billion years before being engulfed by the Sun_* when it enters its red giant phase, meaning the planet itself will last for roughly 9.5 billion years in total, as it is currently estimated to be 4.5 billion years old." (Google AI)
@@peterking8564Latest estimates put it at about 10 billion years.
@@andrewnelson3681 lol I think quite clearly they meant before the planet become uninhabitable by humans, not before the Sun grows into a red giant and swallows the Earth 😂
More like 20yrs if they can’t get approved
The truth is what the funding pays for.
This.
The problem is not which form of electricity generation is the cheapest but which is cheapest to deliver to the customer as required. Renewables fall down badly on both delivery systems, a new massive network of costly transmission lines is required, and timeliness, you need costly backup generators (or humungous batteries) on standby for when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. When you factor in those costs renewables are not the cheapest. Which is why electricity costs are sky-rocketing. Take away the subsidies and the economics collapses.
And scientists wonder why the public doesn't trust them anymore.
Csiro are Corrupted.
This is the problem - the corruption of science by money and ideology. These false reports will cost Australia dearly. There needs to be an inquiry into the objectivity of the CSIRO - and universities.
Sounds to me like all those involved in this report need to lose their jobs for presenting lies instead of an unbiased report.
Correct. These people at CSIRO doing Gencost are not stupid, they know exactly what they are doing which makes them all the more culpable. They need to go 😡
Perhaps the CSIRO could be defunded along with the ABC. Clean up two sources of pollution at once .😊
And the BOM
I really support this, #notmyabc
I would only support this if it abolished commercial media too. They are no better.
So....if renewables are cheaper why is my power more expensive now.
Excellent delivery. Facts tell no lies. This 'government' must go.
Providing what the pollies want not the truth
Any truth in CSIRO doesn't have nuclear experts, so outsourced the Nuclear section of Gencost to outside consultants that are Renewables consultants?
Thanks for the honesty. Nice to see someone telling that truth..
It's amazing how our public agencies are not independent of political pressures and obviously so.
Since when would politicians be interested in informing the public? In any case, a nice report and analysis.
Australian Gas light-ing Co has a lot to do with these outcomes.
Thank you for highlighting this. Unbiased reporting is so important.
Honesty and integrity are now optional for bureaucrats. They're following the lead of corporate boards
Yes and renewables alone is infinitely more expensive that coal or gas or nuclear when the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow. This is just common sense!
I'm sure you have a well organised life young Lady but, We as a country could prosper with you in the Senate. A huge ask but could you please stand. Shame job CSIRO.
thank you - confirmed my own numbers based on Asian energy industry. It is political propaganda, not a proper technical report. I suggest they get a foreign industry body to do it rather than the biased Australia group.
Copied…. So why did the CSIRO decide to exclude a proven energy technology used around the world from their GenCost report which everyone treats as the gold standard in generation technology cost estimates?
Whatever Mr Blackout says, the opposite is true! 😂
Even if the CSIRO's numbers were skewed in favor of political preference, surely it would be worth the extra investment for nuclear.
Having our electricity supply self sufficient and reliable over the long term should be considered priceless given what we have seen overseas in recent years.
Not only is so called "renewable" energy the most expensive, it's completely environmentally unfriendly.
From start to finish, it is the most environmentally disastrous policy that can be made. From manufacture to disposal, everything it touches turns is destructive.
@@willdsm08 Exactly. Make it make sense. Destroying the environment to "save" the environment. Only a government could come up with such sheer stupidity.
Its tough being a scientist working for gov these days. But the job description kind of requires you to resist the pressures and tell the truth. Politicians are necessarily amatures in a democracy. They must have good advice from the public service, you cannot outsource this to companies. In their turn, politicians need to have enough wisdom to keep their hands off the advisors. Ask hard questions, for sure, but dont threaten or seek to influence the result.
Many years ago I wrote an independent report for NAB. I told the truth and they quickly binned it and terminated my services. Then they then paid another independent consultant to rewrite the report and several other reports. After that experience I never cared for the truth, I just cared for what the one paying the bill wanted to hear.
CSIRO should get out of politics and go back to doing science
CSIRO are pushing the climate change hoax so they're not even doing real science any more.
This gencost report is equivalent to a year ten assignment with the same level of insight.
Thanks CIS, for a fantastic fact check, Politicians especially the labour party will never make factual decisions when it comes to nuclear as it gets in the road of their renewable's agenda, and we can't have that can we.
Excellent presentation. Thankyou
There are currently 60 new nuclear plants under construction in the world.including design, construction ,running costs and maint and then demolishment
Cost of power produced is 2 cents per kwhr.cost of coal/gas is 4 approx per kwhr,cost of solar is about 10 to 14 cents per kwhr.just work out the cost of one panel divided by 20 years, then work out how much power the panel generates.everybody will be horified.comments from a civil engineer.
You didn't include construction and decommission (or replacement even if you use the same site) costs... meh, that just drives the solar and wind further into the stratosphere. Indeed, you could call the cost exorbitant, though I prefer the description of the cost as infinite.
@@wheel-man5319 no,that does include construction and decommissioning.!!
I worked on Mt Piper construction and yes it was designed for 4 units, the plans were based on Bayswater Power Station, which was 4 units, Mt Piper Units were on the plans were called Bayswater units 5,6,7,8, but only units 5 and 6 were built but these are the Mt Piper units of 1 and 2, also no one ever mentions the wide spread rolling 4hr blackout of NSW in the early 1980's due to NSW not having enough power in the grid, as if we are repeating history. I find that CSIRO and the ABC are running the same ideologies
Did bowen just say something? Nothing anybody believes tho??
Truth is that any report reflects the wishes the payer of the report believes.
This is true for a consulting firm, but , but shouldn't be for a scientific institute.
Excellent
"Is the CSIRO’s coal analysis neutral?"
As the CSIRO has been successfully infiltrated, NO.
They should be sacked!
If it’s the cheapest form of energy why does South Australia have the most expensive electricity in the world? Even with all the wind turbines and solar panels, astronomically priced
They are just providing the answers their bosses want. This disease impacts science around the world as the US EPA and even the National Academy of Science in the US play these games. Any questions where activist organizations have an interest, "truth" goes out the window. This phenomenon has infected many environmental science areas.
CDutton needs to grab this with both hands. How disgracefull the CSIRO has just lost all credibility
You are doing a amazing job. Keep it up
The Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) is funded by a mix of private donors, corporations, and philanthropic foundations. One foundation that has been historically linked to funding CIS is the Cormack Foundation, a private investment fund associated with the Liberal Party of Australia in Victoria.
It staggers me that as a country that produces 1.4% of the C02 in the world's atmosphere we as a nation are wasting time, resources, energy & effort, our limited finances and our expertise on all these so called Alternatives including nuclear.
When we need the cheapest most readily avaialable energy to reshore our manufacturing so we are not held to ransome by large overseas countries that are using coal, building 100's of new coal power stations and stripping our nation of jobs, production, tax base and income. As Dietrich Bonhoffer said, "Stupidy is more intractable than wickedness".
_It staggers me that as a country that produces 1.4% of the C02 in the world's atmosphere_
What matters is per-capita CO2 production. Clearly, that's a step beyond your understanding. Australia emits 15.01 tons/person against the world average of 4.8, placing Australia at no 12 of per-capita emitters. For raw emissions, Australia is no 16, still very much closer to the top than the bottom.
Manufacturing is not viable in Australia as Australia has the highest minimum wage in the world. Search it.
Australia also has one of the lowest (102 of 145) economic complexity indices in the world, below Nepal, Rwanda, Bangladesh, etc. Search _economic complexity index by country._ That means Australia's national economy is a simple, raw-materials-exporting, third-world economy. Luckily, there's enough raw materials to keep all of us relatively wealthy. But, of course, you know nothing about this. Australia embraces ignorance and celebrates stupidity.
Its all political driven. If we were really worried about klimate change why not holding export of coal overseas?
Have you heard of the Paris Agreement and each countries commitment to lower CO2? And yes we should limit coal exports, but I think these are going to drop dramatically in the year ahead as it replaced by cheaper energy alternatives.
@@peterking8564What are the *_"cheaper alternatives"_* to coal?
@@aliendroneservices6621Only nuclear....
Wanna bet he opposes that too?
Renewable is the most EXPENSIVE system ever built!
Not one person in the comments section is a scientist.
Labor’s Head of CSIRO I’ll take the next 100 questions on notice! Don’t want to distort the misleading info in the report with the truth.
PS I err, in fact oil, gas, coal, uranium, sunlight and wind are ALL free actually. It is the cost of getting their end product [power], into your toaster, air conditioner and motor car that determines how expensive and economical, they can be. Coal and particularly brown coal as in Victori is till the cheapest. Surely the CSIRO can come up witha cleaner method and more efficient of producing electricity then our current 1800s designed current power stations???
True story... If you figure out an engine that is 40% efficient, you could make electricity at lower cost than what the power company sells.
Csiro is 'publically funded ' ... that means GOVERNMENT FUNDED ... So you better get the results they want if you want funding next year.😊🇦🇺
CIS is funded secretly by unnamed donors ... who get what they pay for.
You guys should read State of Fear by Michael Crichton
CIS also make the flawed assumption that recent bid prices when coal set the price represent the cost of new coal. It’s more like that these prices represent the short run marginal cost for coal plants . That is it has no allowances for capital return.
It would be great to have independent analysis from someone like the the Centre for Independent Studies, however it does not publish its funding sources and is widely regarded as having a strong bias to the right side of politics in Australia. This debate over the Gencost is largely pointless anyway, as investors run their own numbers, perform their own risk assessments and have decided not to install new coal plants in Australia for quite some time.
Technology that works and is cost effective doesn't need to be subsidised by the Government. It would be installed purely because it /is/ cost effective. And if that were true, renewables would be powering every remote community in Australia. Instead, it's all diesel generators.
This think tank is not independent. A strong Liberal bent.
Thank you for your research and sharing.
Great work CIS
It is the coal. Generators who are closing their plants as uneconomic …. They should know!
Coal generators are being forced out by an electricity market that is being deliberately manipulated to do just that, all to meet nut zero targets. Australia is stuffed if we can't turn this around soon.
Coal generators are being forced out of an electricity market that is being deliberately manipulated to do precisely that, just to meet nut zero targets and line some grifters pockets. Australia is stuffed if we can't turn this around soon.
its really not hard if renewables really were the "cheapest form of energy" every man and his dog would be fighting over building it, we wouldn't have an energy under supply we would have and over supply.
The CIS is a PR firm for Gina Rineheart.
How much power would one nuclear power plant generate?
_How much power would one nuclear power plant generate?_
They come in different sizes. One modular plant is about 300MW. Bill Gates' TerraPower will put out about 345MW which is quickly scalable to about 500MW for over 5 hours--that's enough for 400 homes. It uses the heat from the molten salt to do this.
There are many big nuclear power stations around the world putting out about 1GW--the same as a big coal plant. Koeberg's two plants in Africa put out 1.940GW combined. We're far behind in Australia.
The two Hinckley C plants will put out 3.2GW combined and are expected to last 60 years.
This argument shouldn't be about cost. It should be based on reliability, and renewables fails badly..
Pity about the health destroying effluent and the damage merury does to our brains. The water consumption is insane, the cleanup costs huge and often avoided by big coal. The fly ash is also a toxic problem. None of these problems exist with solar and wind.
Two brownfield sites with space beside? The mean of current pricing might be too high as a comparison? Wow these arguments are so compelling.
But wait isnt Coal just another fossil fuel? Or has somone worked out that the CSIRO was mistaken or had misrepresented that!
CIS,
FIRSTLY
Brownfield can be More Expensive than Greenfield.
But You are Right Brownfield can be Cheaper than Greenfield.
Hence the Truth about which is Cheapest is done on a Case by Case Basis.
Plus with Consideration of Background Socio-Economic Environment at the Time of Intended Build.
SECONDLY
CIS's Coal Cost Estimates for Kogan Creek Assume Stable OIL Prices.
It Pays to Remember Coal is Very Very Reliant on OIL.
THIRDLY
The Insurance Cost of Aussie OIL and COAL is Underwritten by the Federal Government.
Hence if COAL had to Pay Market Insurance Rates that Reflect the RISK.
COAL Would be Much More Expensive Per Tonne.
This Underwriting of COAL, OIL, GAS Risks is Part of the Reason Many Nations, Including Australia, have to Pay REPARATIONS for Global Climate Change Issues.
why the hell is coal so expensive, we have like, all of the coal and it's easily accessible. the mining companies should be supplying our plants for free in return for allowing them to mine in the first place.
Kogan creek is not the newest coal plant in Australia, its not even the second newest. Although it might be the newest supercrit.
As usual excellent analysis and presentation. Thank you 💙
“Taking out the recent price spike over the last 5 years”.
Why not 10 years?
I searched for Centre for Liberal Party Policy Studies and first result was you guys!!
Same guys paying for your data are the same guys funding the Liberal Party
The only people that fall for this are experts.
The Japanese burn AUS coal with a massive reduction in emissions.
The CSIRO isn't a scientific organisation anymore.
It has become politicalised and now focuses on justifying ideologies with religious verve, with only selective consideration of actual science where absolutely necessary.
That's what you get with a couple of decades of politically motivated hiring of the right "scientists" and management, and the dismissal of anyone who disagrees with the "agreed science".
The whole ethos of science is not to agree with beliefs, but to pursue the truth as illuminated by the data. Not the truth as enforced by politicians like Bowen.
All this does is push people away from both parties and to a teal, so what do they do? Make it hard for teals to get noticed and call out to what people want to know and policy for
So, the report's required outcome was predetermined, and the data and narrative manipulated to suit Bowen's end result.
The CSIRO seems to give information the government requires. Spineless!
Tell the boss what he wants to hear.
Reports are always subject to garbage in garbage out accusations. The base data and methodology need to be understood first to determine if they are accurate and appropriate for the required purpose. There should be scientific, not public servant or political, review of the findings by qualified scientific experts - none of which happens any more, if ever. It then simply becomes a football match to see who can spin it the best. A disappointing way to treat our children’s future. Just let Adi Paterson and a panel of foreign nuclear experts do the work and present the findings - I may actually pay attention to their conclusions.
Its a political Report to find the Political Pre determined Answer which will fail
Who does the Australian Government actually work for???
The Centre for Independent Studies is biased. Sort of contradictory, yes?
Agreed. However, CIS makes no bones about the fact that they are biased, and what their biases are.
CSIRO and AEMO claim to be unbiased, and will not reveal their biases, even in the face of a FOI requests. Clearly gotta protect those deep Australian military secrets - about _public_ policy.
Independent studies doesn't mean unbiased, just means not government propaganda based.
@@peterwilson9165 You making up the rules now, lol?
@@factnotfiction5915 A strange defense - how are we supposed to debate this matter with lobbyists like this presenting biased analyses? And I don't see anything similar from my side of the "debate".
You and I will never agree, but this is just BS. Then you assert that AEMO and CSIRO are biased - I can't accept that. Just because you don't like what GENCOST said, is no reason to libel those organisations (and the staff).
I can accede that GENCOST could be flawed, and maybe should be revised, in the light of all the analysis and possibly dubious assumptions, and criticism from your side, but it was a first attempt at such a study. The answer isn't to ignore everything it says.
Can you imagine how people are going to react when Ted O'Brien finally releases HIS position paper?
@footbru not at all
CSIRO is probably going to get a larger funding
A video worth watching.
Make the
Report look favourable and align to Labor policy's or else
Defund the CSIRO
Well done!!
How about telling the truth for once? Does Australia have a national reserve policy? When the ALP implemented a Reserve on GAS (For 12mths) the LNP Media went crazy - How dare you lock in a lower price for Australians to pay! Why is Australia a country so rich in resource but doesn't look after its people? Again, LNP politics at play when Mr Howard allowed the Gas cartel to write their own policy on selling all the GAS overseas, now we sell overseas and buy it back again! All coal burnt, is bought at world Market rate, WHY! You keep complaining about renewable, not sure if you watch the price of South Australian energy prices which is constantly Negative, due to excess Renewable generation. Start doing your own research people from respected sources, not this Rubbish!
Existing sites are near mi bed out coal mines …. Good luck trucking coal to the existing generator sites for the next 30 years
Just lies. The old CSIRO would not do this. The new embarrassing WOKE CSIRO does. Disgraceful
Oh CSIRO... I remember when you were awesome
Is CIS neutral