WPL and Federal Labor Govt, page-34

True about Mr Forrest - it may however have been useful if he had studied "thermodynamics" and the concepts of thermal efficiency, entropy and enthalpy; unlike politics and economics these are fundamental laws of physics which are unlikely to change significantly. He also may find it useful to understand that renewable energy is NOT free - it requires Capex, maintenance and operation and that capacity factors (operation for such limited periods of a few hours per day and sometimes not avaialbe at all for many days) was also understood - I guess like King Canut (who as king commanded the tide to change) he maybe could make the wind blow consistently or the sun shine at midnight.

Mr Forest is a successful businessman and entrepreneur but that doesn't have too much impact on physics but does maybe makgood case for subsidies from gullible politicians and "greenies". Happy to play the subsidy game but prefer not to be an FMG shareholders sponsoring Mr Forests FFI initiatives without a good and resilient business case (usually adds up to subsidies from either government of enlisted customers - i.e people without roof top solar). Whilst renewables may look good on an LCOE metric that metric is very flawed. The "system" costs (firming, standby, rainy day backup, land, network, "inertia" for frequency stability etc) of renewables (and H2) make them look much less attractive - but I guess Mr Forrest wants the gullible public (or their elected representatives) to pay for those. To me we need to cut CO2 but renewables to about 60* and nuclear power (for firming) are the only practical ways forward - H2 (apart from for feedstock) is impractical and very expensive.