And there is you point of difference & the lie that is so easy to believe.
"Renewables that will enable transport to be zero emission as well"
Its not comprehension issues.....I just don't believe the tripe we are being fed.
The solution is elegant --if you are Elon Musk.
In order to try to counter that simple one line fallacy is more time than I care to put to the argument.
Cradle to the grave- electric cars are NOT zero emission. We live in a closed system. All we are doing is moving the point of pollution.
Creating & running an electric car does not improve the balance of CO2 & other pollutants by the margin you have been lead to believe.
Even the sacred solar panels are going to create a environmental headache when the pass their use by date.
Billions upon billions of panels will need to be recycled & replaced in 20 to 30 years time.
They end up being at barely break even in co2.
When they are on the roof making power , yes they are zero Co2, but they start from a heavily negative Co2 deficit perspective when you take the cost to mine, construct, transport around the world, tranport to site, copper cabling, insulation, then removable & recycing...the big kicker trying to recycle them with less energy than they return.
The world will have new mountains the size of Everest to contend with in 20 to 30 years time, & there will be a tax on you to dispose of your panels (the greens will ensure that)
You are kidding yourself if you think the renewables are zero cost to the environment.
But the green lie is easy to perpetuate & if you say it enough people will believe.
How dare you think otherwise...Greenies know best.
I'm all about doing more with less & we need to lessen our foot print & would LOVE to reduce our oil dependence on the Arabs
..(Can I say that in this politically correct world now..Phfft I'm too old to care)
This is not the seismic shift we are being brain washed to believe.
If Australia did nothing in regards to CO2 restraint, it would barely cause a ripple in the net effect of C02 production in the world.
But we are happy to make ourselves, less competitive in the world & burden ourselves with the extra cost & tax associated, so the few bleeding hearts can bang their chest & proudly claim, look at the difference we made.
As a per capita we are the leading Co2 producer. Shock horror. The typical green stance, we HAVE to do something...anything is better than nothing...isn't it?
Bang lets throw copious amount of money at the problem, to solve a problem we aren't creating & in no way can we have a significant impact on the end result.
View attachment 1135945
As a percentage of world pollution in China is over 20 times Aust.
If we were by some miracle able to get to ZERO in Australia, (ie reduce figures by 1.3 mtCo2), would be great but not in any shape achievable..so we shoot for a 20% reduction..
But assume a 100% utopian world is achievable here with enough taxes & tech.
China to achieve the same result would only have to reduce its Co2 output by 5.8%.
Which will have the bigger drag on their respective economy to achieve this results? Once we get to ZERO, we can't do any more. Do we then throw more money overseas then?
At least China has 38 Nuclear power plant & 20 under construction (ie planning to commission these in the next 7 year) or the equivalent of 1 nuclear power plant to be commissioned every 18 weeks for the next 7 years.
By 2030 nuclear capacity will be 120 to 150 GWe, and nuclear will provide 8% to 10% of electricity in China. (As of March 2018,
Australia had over 7,803 MW of installed photovoltaic (
PV)
solar power of which ZERO power is produced after dark).
China have got it right, get the infrastructure right first, then the rest is easy as it will follow as a nature path forward.
Our way will be to Tax our way to greatness, make concessions & give subsidy & rebates for what? Next to no net result on the world stage?
So if we (Aust) are going the solar route, we need to step up the installation rate by a 2000 fold to match the reduction in CO2 production from electricity production..then theres the batteries that are requied.
Along with electrification of its bus fleet & a ban on ice motors, China are getting the infrastructure in place first to take that step & on target to a 40% reduction in pollution at a fraction of the cost & have a long term cheap stable 24/7 supply of power.
We now need to build batteries to store our power as the solar power produces Zero at dark..or what is our base load look like?
Are we good during the day & burn coal at night to keep the lights on?
Or do we follow South Aust path that on a hot day industry just shuts down?
Cheap clean power will make China the economic power house of the world in our life time, whilst we are all staddled with the burden of the green legacy & wondering what the hell happened in that one generation.
We build a ridiculous battery in S Aust that for the most is charged by coal fired power stations from QLD due to the wind 'drought' & has a life cycle of what 10 to 12 years (but thats another rant
Enjoy your morning coffee
View attachment 1135948
