That's some interesting power generation figures. It is very selective of course to not show figures when renewables peak during a sunny & windy day.
Normally this debate leads to claims about renewables also being the cheapest which they are when compared to a 50+ year old coal plant being kept running because batteries and renewables are not capable of providing electricity 24 hours a day per week 365 days per year so they need coal to come to the rescue. The claims about renewables never use a 50 year old solar panel as the comparison point so why use a 50 year old coal plant when comparing figures - this is very selective.
As Australia is not pragmatic enough to build a new modern coal plant due to nothing more than political reasons it means that we miss out on the cheapest form of electricity. The comparison is never to a modern HESE or USC black coal plant using high 6000 + cal coal as these produce electricity that is 29% cheaper compared to wind turbines once all costs are actually considered including the short life span of wind turbines, disposal cost of the turbine, make good of the land, rental to the land owner, lost generation of farm produce leading to famine and higher costs of fruit/vegetables/meat produced on land where there aren't wind and solar farms, animal burial costs when the turbine hits and kills passing birds, political donations, cost to appoint ex politicians to boards of electricity companies, taxpayer subsidies for installation of wind turbines, local council special slush funds to get the land rezoned, advertising costs to convince the general public that wind turbines are good for them and additional electrical transmission wiring.
It really is very clear that it's time for Australia to look at the true costs of producing electricity via a modern coal plant versus the real costs of renewable power generation. There needs to be a royal commission.
