Australian politics - Perpetual Thread.

Cognac

Ars Praefectus
4,313
Subscriptor++
That's a good point. I hope that Labor and the Greens are able to get their messaging across during the actual run-up to the election. It does feel like the coalition get way more exposure on their batshit claims during the off years, and it's hard to wipe out 3 years of relentless (even if debunked) talking points. I have had that exact experience when I've happened to fall into a discussion about politics with my parents. "If that were true why haven't the media been reporting it during the last few years, instead of it just being political ads before the election?". I kid you not.
 

Bardon

Ars Praefectus
5,777
Subscriptor++
That's a good point. I hope that Labor and the Greens are able to get their messaging across during the actual run-up to the election. It does feel like the coalition get way more exposure on their batshit claims during the off years, and it's hard to wipe out 3 years of relentless (even if debunked) talking points. I have had that exact experience when I've happened to fall into a discussion about politics with my parents. "If that were true why haven't the media been reporting it during the last few years, instead of it just being political ads before the election?". I kid you not.
It doesn't help that the ABC is completely controlled by Murdoch with Ita in charge.
 

Rudi

Ars Legatus Legionis
11,912
Subscriptor++
It doesn't help that the ABC is completely controlled by Murdoch with Ita in charge.
She's no longer the boss, she finished in March but, yeah, it seems outside of Laura Tingle the ABC is all about platforming "the opposition". It seems to me that whilst the LNP are correctly referred to as the opposition on the ABC the government are referred to as "Labor".
 

Bardon

Ars Praefectus
5,777
Subscriptor++
She's no longer the boss, she finished in March but, yeah, it seems outside of Laura Tingle the ABC is all about platforming "the opposition". It seems to me that whilst the LNP are correctly referred to as the opposition on the ABC the government are referred to as "Labor".
Thanks for the correction, and yeah the ship doesn't seem to be turning.
 

Rudi

Ars Legatus Legionis
11,912
Subscriptor++
The Guardian is reporting a story about Dutton taking a private jet to a Reinhardt sponsored event in Tamworth. The tax-payer picked up the tab at $23K. The only other place I can find any mention of this is Reddit. Now I'm not debating the rights or wrongs of this but it will be interesting to see how many other outlets report this and the prominence they give the story. After all if it was Albanese it would be headlines everywhere, remember he couldn't quote the exact cash rate or unemployment figure on the spot in the last election? The media banged on about it for weeks.

Peter Dutton took $23k private jet
 

Cognac

Ars Praefectus
4,313
Subscriptor++
The Guardian is reporting a story about Dutton taking a private jet to a Reinhardt sponsored event in Tamworth. The tax-payer picked up the tab at $23K. The only other place I can find any mention of this is Reddit. Now I'm not debating the rights or wrongs of this but it will be interesting to see how many other outlets report this and the prominence they give the story. After all if it was Albanese it would be headlines everywhere, remember he couldn't quote the exact cash rate or unemployment figure on the spot in the last election? The media banged on about it for weeks.

Peter Dutton took $23k private jet
Bronwyn Bishop copped a fair bit of flack for her $5K helicopter ride to Geelong. Jebus, how was that 9 years ago already? That feels like it happened right before the last election?!

Anyway, fingers crossed Dutton gets smacked around a bit for this too, but I won't get my hopes too far up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bardon

Rudi

Ars Legatus Legionis
11,912
Subscriptor++
Bronwyn Bishop copped a fair bit of flack for her $5K helicopter ride to Geelong. Jebus, how was that 9 years ago already? That feels like it happened right before the last election?!

Anyway, fingers crossed Dutton gets smacked around a bit for this too, but I won't get my hopes too far up.
Yes, the media landscape was a bit better then and Bishop did a good job of making herself look entitled and unlikable. So far, according to my news search on Google, the only sites reporting Dutton's flagrant abuse of us, the tax payers are Guardian Australia, Pedestrian TV and Crikey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bardon

Rudi

Ars Legatus Legionis
11,912
Subscriptor++
Ah well, Albanese is defending Dutton.

From The Guardian Live News:

Albanese defends Dutton’s charter flight as part of ‘doing his job’​

PM Anthony Albanese is taking questions at Flinders University now. He’s been asked whether it is hypocritical of Peter Dutton to take charter flights during a cost of living crisis.

The PM says:
I make no criticism of Peter Dutton catching a charter flight to do his job. That’s his job. He attended a conference, I read that story, in Tamworth. I make no criticism of that. It’s a hard job being leader of the opposition.
 
Bronwyn Bishop copped a fair bit of flack for her $5K helicopter ride to Geelong. Jebus, how was that 9 years ago already? That feels like it happened right before the last election?!

Bishop was Speaker when Abbott was PM. That was, like, 4 PMs ago...

And while I have absolutely no love for that disgraceful old hag, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a grain of truth to her claim that she was made to take the fall to protect Abbott. He was already in severe strife at the time and outlasted Bishop by mere months.
 
My thought on Dutton and nuclear power plants is it's a plan to shovel 10s of Billions of dollars of government money to select big business. Then get himself elected to the board of one (or many), once he's out of politics. It seems like the only plan to make sense.

Oh absolutely. If the Coalition get their way, nuclear will be the new coal. High barrier to entry, humongous cost implications, the perfect vessel for ongoing subsidisation and 'unexpected' cost blowouts. The current coal magnates will somehow end up being in a prime position to start nuclear pursuits, and the pipeline funneling taxpayer money into their pockets will be busier than ever.

Meanwhile we see concerted campaigns in rural Australia against solar and wind farms, because somehow that stuff will be the end of Australia.
 

wco81

Ars Legatus Legionis
28,661
Oh absolutely. If the Coalition get their way, nuclear will be the new coal. High barrier to entry, humongous cost implications, the perfect vessel for ongoing subsidisation and 'unexpected' cost blowouts. The current coal magnates will somehow end up being in a prime position to start nuclear pursuits, and the pipeline funneling taxpayer money into their pockets will be busier than ever.

Meanwhile we see concerted campaigns in rural Australia against solar and wind farms, because somehow that stuff will be the end of Australia.

How much of that anti-renewable sentiment is imported? Here in the US, there are clear astroturf campaigns funded by fossil fuel interests, so you often get rural people talking about property values and how it makes the landscape unsightly. Often farmers and other rural landowners are getting a nice income from leasing their lands for wind farms or solar arrays.

Or you have people protesting offshore wind turbines, supposedly endangering certain whales, even though they're pro oil so they don't have any problems with offshore oil platforms and giant tankers trafficking in the same waters. It's like Trump saying windmills cause cancer or anti-environmentalists suddenly showing concerns for birds.
 

Klockwerk

Ars Praefectus
3,493
Subscriptor
How much of that anti-renewable sentiment is imported? Here in the US, there are clear astroturf campaigns funded by fossil fuel interests, so you often get rural people talking about property values and how it makes the landscape unsightly. Often farmers and other rural landowners are getting a nice income from leasing their lands for wind farms or solar arrays.

Or you have people protesting offshore wind turbines, supposedly endangering certain whales, even though they're pro oil so they don't have any problems with offshore oil platforms and giant tankers trafficking in the same waters. It's like Trump saying windmills cause cancer or anti-environmentalists suddenly showing concerns for birds.

It's hard to tell what's imported and what's home grown, and what's home grown egged on by imported stuff.
Facebook and Twitter and the Internets mean that everything good and bad is pretty much global.
 

VirtualWolf

Ars Legatus Legionis
10,471
Subscriptor++
How much of that anti-renewable sentiment is imported? Here in the US, there are clear astroturf campaigns funded by fossil fuel interests, so you often get rural people talking about property values and how it makes the landscape unsightly. Often farmers and other rural landowners are getting a nice income from leasing their lands for wind farms or solar arrays.

It's probably a bit of everything. The main Australian conservative parties are deeply intertwined with coal and mining conglomerates. Where I live, there is an active campaign against a solar development, fuelled by arguments such as
  • we'd be losing valuable farm land
  • the development would only be sold off to foreign interests (curiously, that's the case for a lot of Australian coal and mining)
  • due to the previous point electricity will become more expensive
  • we will lose what makes Australia great (???)

The campaign is conducted across Facebook, local papers (which conveniently only parrot the campaign's talking points without providing any form of counterbalance), and I can see more and more posters saying things like 'Don't sell your land for solar developments' and things like that. They're studiously avoiding the appearance of being against any renewables, instead focusing on concrete developments. But I get the distinct feeling that's just a facade.
 
Holy goddamn shit this is getting stupider and stupider. 🤦


Littleproud is gearing up to eclipse Barnaby in his heyday. I was hoping the man would bring back some sense to the party after the dreary Joyce/McCormack years, but the Nationals are nuttier than ever, especially with Bridget McKenzie leading the screeching brigade now.
 
So, under a Coalition government, nuclear power plants would be built in (edited) Collie, Mt Piper, Callide, Tarong, Liddell, Northern energy in South Australia and Loy Yang.


The NSW Premier has already taken a stance against it.


Meanwhile, cartoonist Cathy Wilcox had this to say:


Edit: This is turning more and more into a shit sandwich.

"Coalition MPs were told the power plants would be owned by a government corporation, with a similar model to the national broadband network and Snowy 2.0 hydro power."

Because both those projects have worked out excessively well...

"The sites were chosen on the basis of water availability, capacity of connection to the grid and the closure date of existing coal power plants. None of the seven sites are currently owned by the commonwealth."

But:

"Tarong in Queensland is a particular issue as it doesn’t have a secure water source."

You can't make this shit up.
 
Last edited:

NavyGothic

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
9,995
Subscriptor
Political wankery at its finest. Those nuclear plants will never be built and everyone knows it; but Dutton et al will happily lie all the way to the bank just to muddy the waters on renewables.

Where I'm a little boggled is why the Coalition thinks this is a vote winner.
 
Last edited:

SpocksBeer

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,437
Subscriptor++
I work in the energy industry. There's no way, no how anything like this will be built. The Coalition knows this, which means this is just a method of generating noise to drown out Labor. And it's working very effectively.

Unfortunately I suspect vocal sections of the public will lap this up, and the next election will be fought on the stupidest battleground possible. But it will be a battleground of the opposition's choosing, and as such perhaps the smartest dumb thing they can do with the cards they have. I almost look forward to the winning and having to choke on this stupid shit for the next 4 years.
 

VirtualWolf

Ars Legatus Legionis
10,471
Subscriptor++
I think the thing I find most frustrating is that the fucking federal LNP has absolutely no vision WHATSOEVER of improving the country in any way, at all. It's just "Keep everything as it is" with the exception of "More power to business, fuck the workers". I'm not sure I've ever heard a single "Let's improve society"-type suggestion from them, if they were in power they did nothing, if they're in opposition it's just relentless negativity against anything and everything that Labor does, without offering any positive alternative.
 

VirtualWolf

Ars Legatus Legionis
10,471
Subscriptor++
Yep, and as Renew Economy pointed out:

Dutton’s contention that his nuclear plans require no new transmission is also contentious. The 1.4 gigawatt units cited in the media release are double the size of any other unit ever built in Australia’s main grid and will require a significant upgrade of transmission and back-up capacity in case of a trip or outage.
Other investors, including the site owners, have plans for that transmission. In Collie, for instance, two of the country’s biggest batteries are already under construction, and more are planned. There likely won’t be room for either a big nuclear power station at the site, or the transmission capacity to transport it to where the power is needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bardon

Cognac

Ars Praefectus
4,313
Subscriptor++
It's just so incredibly stupid. No public money. No, we'll own it. And we'll build it faster than the experts think is possible. With technologies that haven't proven to be budget or timeline friendly in any jurisdiction.

The costing for this plan must be upwards of $300BB.

And putting all of them in coalition seats seems like an all-risk no-reward strategy? Like, even if you want to make the battleground of the climate wars perfect-vs-good, there's already such a bad rap for nuclear power on multiple fronts (NIMBY, costs, etc) that doing so in seats you currently hold seems like you're risking losing votes than making a ploy to win votes in other seats?

One of the other issues that hasn't been covered as much, this new fantastic plan which is going to cost way more than any alternative and take way too long to build, that is supposedly designed to replace power being generated by coal plants....will only replace about 30% of coal-generated power that is currently in the mix. The remaining 70%, as plants shut down, would still need to be covered by alternative solutions (like, you know, renewables or gas).

I can't facepalm hard enough.
 

Bondles_9

Ars Scholae Palatinae
641
Subscriptor
One of the other issues that hasn't been covered as much, this new fantastic plan which is going to cost way more than any alternative and take way too long to build, that is supposedly designed to replace power being generated by coal plants....will only replace about 30% of coal-generated power that is currently in the mix. The remaining 70%, as plants shut down, would still need to be covered by alternative solutions (like, you know, renewables or gas).

I can't facepalm hard enough.
Don't forget that even on Dutton's utterly made-up 2035 timeline, there's still at least 5-year Callide + Eraring + Yallourn + Collie sized hole in power generation with no plan to fill it.
 

VirtualWolf

Ars Legatus Legionis
10,471
Subscriptor++
Definitely a good choice:


And on the opposite side of things, the nuclear lobby says they're going to have to switch off rooftop solar in order for fixed base-load nuclear to be on the grid.


🤦🏻‍♀️

Not that this wasn't obvious, but they've actually been forced to say it out loud.
 

Lt_Storm

Ars Praefectus
16,294
Subscriptor++
Definitely a good choice:


And on the opposite side of things, the nuclear lobby says they're going to have to switch off rooftop solar in order for fixed base-load nuclear to be on the grid.


🤦🏻‍♀️

Not that this wasn't obvious, but they've actually been forced to say it out loud.
I mean, if there is too much generation on the grid, you need to shut something off, this is basic grid management. From a cost perspective, once the plant is built, both nuclear and solar power are essentially free, so the question of which to shut off is mostly one of ease and response time.
 

bjn

Ars Praefectus
3,217
Subscriptor++
I mean, if there is too much generation on the grid, you need to shut something off, this is basic grid management. From a cost perspective, once the plant is built, both nuclear and solar power are essentially free, so the question of which to shut off is mostly one of ease and response time.
If you are going to build a load following NPP, you are going to have to deal with many more thermal cycles than one designed to run at high capacity factors, so adding to the capital cost. While the bulk of the cost of an NPP may be capital and financing, it still has an opex that is pretty much fixed. You have to pay for the operators, the maintenence and armed guards regardless of whether you are generating electricity or not, so it's not all free. Solar's opex is a rounding error in comparison to its capex.

Talking of capex, Hinkley Point C is going to cost at least USD 18.5/W by the time it is finished. For comparison you could by solar panels on the international market for USD 0.125 at the begining of the year.
 

Lt_Storm

Ars Praefectus
16,294
Subscriptor++
If you are going to build a load following NPP, you are going to have to deal with many more thermal cycles than one designed to run at high capacity factors, so adding to the capital cost. While the bulk of the cost of an NPP may be capital and financing, it still has an opex that is pretty much fixed. You have to pay for the operators, the maintenence and armed guards regardless of whether you are generating electricity or not, so it's not all free. Solar's opex is a rounding error in comparison to its capex.

Talking of capex, Hinkley Point C is going to cost at least USD 18.5/W by the time it is finished. For comparison you could by solar panels on the international market for USD 0.125 at the begining of the year.
Nuclear powers operating costs are also essentially a rounding error on comparison to capex. The huge costs associated with nuclear are all embedded costs, mostly construction costs beyond defrayed over decades, and, perhaps, water management when you do it then dumb way. So, once you have built the thing, you have already spent that money / incurred those costs.

Running a nuclear plant is essentially free. Building it is not, nor is keeping the waste on site. Those are the expensive parts.
 

wco81

Ars Legatus Legionis
28,661
But what would happen, people who installed solar and have been paying low prices would have to turn it off or disconnect from the grid if new nuclear came online?

And that nuclear-generated electricity would be more costly than what they'd been paying with rooftop solar?

That's not going to win them any fans.
 

bjn

Ars Praefectus
3,217
Subscriptor++
Definitely a good choice:


And on the opposite side of things, the nuclear lobby says they're going to have to switch off rooftop solar in order for fixed base-load nuclear to be on the grid.


🤦🏻‍♀️

Not that this wasn't obvious, but they've actually been forced to say it out loud.
The party of freedom and free markets prove yet again that it's freedom and free markets except when they and their mates might lose some money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirtualWolf
I mean, if there is too much generation on the grid, you need to shut something off, this is basic grid management. From a cost perspective, once the plant is built, both nuclear and solar power are essentially free, so the question of which to shut off is mostly one of ease and response time.
Australia has HUGE installed rooftop solar, because all governments have supported it.

Telling a large percentage of voters to (effectively) chuck away their privately installed solar panels will not go down well.
It wouldn't impress me, even if we put ours in about 15 years ago. Still working fine, thank you LNP. (Though by the time nuclear power is making any impact they will be close to 40 years old)