#Renewables

XR don’t even believe their own BS

Interesting to see that the Extinction Rebellion (XR) don’t even believe their own prophecies. How interesting to claim 12 years to save the planet and then just strike it out with 12 months. Why not 12 weeks, days or hours? If indeed it is 12 months, why waste time to organize a rally in October? Why waste time? Surely yesterday makes more sense if we must panic.

The chap on the stands was talking about the wish for 10,000 arrests in the hopes presumably of overwhelming police resources and forcing a negotiation.

CM was caught in an interesting conversation with XR followers who were demanding CM was blocked from the forum. CM merely engaged with data and despite mentioning China was 29.3% of CO2 emissions the response was their emissions per capita were lower. While true, what an irrelevant argument to give a free pass to the Chinese when they emit c.30% and rising of the very gas XR are fretting about and demanding we remediate ASAP.

Another XR follower demanded CO2 look at his FB page to justify his command of climate change. Littered with pictures of Greta Thunberg and articles from The Guardian. In any event one post caught CM’s eye – one that CM went back to the XR followers who demanded CM was blocked to explain they should probably look in the mirror.

XR doesn’t rule over anyone but they certainly don’t allow criticism.

Flotsam and Jet Some

This is the downside of virtue signaling. 16yo pigtailed activist Greta Thunberg’s misguided altruism will unfortunately lead to more carbon emissions than had she flown by commercial jet. Her solar powered sailing boat might have made her feel warm and fuzzy inside but there is a catch that probably hasn’t been mentioned.

According to a spokeswoman for Team Malizia, “We added the trip to New York City at very short notice, and as a result two people need to fly over to the U.S. in order to bring the boat back…The world has not yet found a way to make it possible to cross an ocean without a carbon footprint.

Presumably two of the other crew members will fly home. So that’s the equivalent of two return flights where Thunberg would have only costed only one.

The irony. In order to save the planet, she has inadvertently bumped the very footprint she tried to avoid (although technically the scheduled flights were going anyway). To think she missed out on gourmet airline meals served on plastic trays and reruns of David Attenborough’s Climate Change:The Facts on a loop. Even better she wouldn’t need to poop in a bucket.

What a joke.

Thank God China has clarified the Pacific Island claims with action

One would think China is channeling the former Iraqi Ministry of Information.

China’s Special Envoy to the Pacific, Ambassador Wang Xuefeng, told the Pacific Island Forum in Tuvalu,

“As the largest developing country in the world, China always attaches great importance to the special concerns and legitimate demands of small island countries in combating climate change…Developed countries should earnestly carry out their obligations set out in the (UN Climate Change) Convention and the (Paris) Agreement, including providing sufficient support in terms of finance, technology and capacity-building to small island countries and other developing countries to help them increase their capacities in combating climate change.”

What he should have added was,

We intend to belch as much CO2 as we please until 2030. We know we’re already 29.3% of global CO2 emissions. We’re not sure why but until the Extinction Rebellion Beijing chapter starts we figure it mustn’t be a concern in China. ”

Perhaps the most laughable part of it was to say all countries, big or small, are equal in China’s eyes. Except HK, Taiwan, Paracelsus, Spratly and Senkaku Islands.

It wasn’t so long ago that CM was covering machinery stocks and local Chinese governments preferred industry polluted because it meant fines that filled up their coffers. The industry obliged because it was cheaper to produce by paying the fines.

Perhaps China will open its doors to all these climate refugees when whole villages are forced to move to mountain tops.

We should expect that Ambassador Wang will travel by sailing boat to future summits. It’s for the planet you know.

Extinction Rebellion prepares for the communist catwalk

That’s it folks. Forget fashion. Ditch your Manolo Blahniks. Shred your DVF dresses. Burn your designer Armani jeans in a pyre. Even better write a placard and protest outside Gucci or Louis Vuitton. It’s for the planet you know.

Extinction Rebellion (XR) has said London fashion week is unsustainable. Ladies, prepare to wear drab grey gender neutral pant suits from now on. Men will be allowed to wear a skirt presumably so as to foster transgenderism. This will be year round. We’ll be allowed one set only.

The Guardian journalist, Lucy Siegle, wrote,

“the environmental group Extinction Rebellion has seized the initiative, writing to the British Fashion Council (BFC), conveners of London fashion week, demanding it is scrapped in favour of “a people’s assembly of industry professionals and designers as a platform to declare a climate and ecological emergency”

So let’s get this straight, these XR hippiecrits use the very materials and dyes to make a fashion statement to push their agenda.

Tell you what XR, given that China is the largest producer of textiles, please take your protest to Beijing. While you’re at it you can protest China’s 29.3% (and growing) impact on CO2 emissions. Two for the price of one. President Xi would warmly welcome your presence in one of his jails. Afterall you encourage peaceful arrest although you might want to update your legal assistance page for those who do end up being arrested in Tiananmen Square.

Buhahahahaha

In 1999, CM was told by the pro-EV lobby that electric cars would be 10% or the market by 2010. In 2019 EVs are struggling to nudge 1.3%. If EV’s have managed to achieve much more than 10-12% by 2035 it will be a miracle.

10 reasons it will be highly unlikely:

1) Australia sold just over 1.15m cars in 2018. In 2008, SUVs comprised 19% of total sales. Today 43%. So much for the unbridled panic about catastrophic climate change if consumption patterns are a guide.

2) Australian fuel excise generates 5% of total tax revenue. It is forecast to grow from $19bn today to $24bn by 2021. If government plans to subsidize then it’ll likely to add to the deficit, especially if it lobs $5,000 per car subsidies on 577,000 cars (50% of 2018 unit sales in Australia).

CM has always argued that governments will eventually realize that moving to full EV policy will mean losing juicy ‘fuel excise’. Point 16 on page 19 for those interested.

Cash strapped Illinois has proposed the introduction of a $1,000 annual registration fee (up from $17.50) to account for the fact EVs don’t pay such fuel taxes. Note Illinois has the lowest investment grade among any other American state and has to allocate 40% of its budget just to pay outstanding bills. It is also home to one of the largest state pension unfunded deficits per capita in the country.

3) cash for clunkers? If the idea is to phase out fossil fueled powered cars, surely the resale/trade in values will plummet to such a degree that trading it on a new EV makes no sense at all. False economy trade where fossil fuel owners will hold onto existing cars for longer.

4) Global EV production is 2.1m units. Looking at existing production plans by 2030, it is likely to be around 12mn tops on a conservative basis. Australia would need want 5% of world EV supply when were only 1.2% of global car sales. Many auto makers are committed to selling 50% of EV capacity into China. So Shorten will be fighting for the remaining pie. No car makers will export 10% of all EV production to Australia without substantial incentives to do so.

Don’t forget Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also intends to get every fossil fueled powered car off the road in a decade. The US has 270 million registered vehicles, the overwhelming majority being petrol powered. The US sells 16-17mn cars a year (sadly slowing). Therefore in the US, 16 years would be required to achieve that target.

5) Ethics of EVs. To save the planet, the majority of cobalt to go into making the batteries comes from African mines which use child slave laborers. There is a moral scruple to keep a virtue signaling activist awake at night!

Not to worry, Glencore has just announced last week it is closing its cobalt capacity in DR Congo which will flip the market from surplus to deficit (at 1.2% global market share). Oops.

6) EV makers aren’t happy. In Europe there are over 200 cities with EV programs but none are alike. In the quest to outdo each other on the virtue signaling front, car makers are struggling to meet such diverse requirements meaning roll outs will be slow because there is no movement to standardize.

7) EV suppliers aren’t convinced. Because of the above, many EV suppliers are reluctant to go too hard in committing to new capacity because global car markets are slowing in China, US, Europe and Australia. High fixed cost businesses hate slowdowns. Writing down the existing capacity would be punitive to say the least. New capacity takes a minimum of 2 years to come on line from conception.

8) The grid! In the UK, National Grid stated that to hit the UK targets for EVs by 2030, an entirely new 8GW nuclear plant would be required to meet the demands of EV charging. Australia can barely meet its energy needs with the current policies and doubling down on the same failed renewables strategy that has already proved to fall well short of current demand ex any EVs added to the grid.

9) in 1999 automotive experts hailed that EVs would make up 10% of all vehicle sales by 2010. In 2019 EVs make up around 2.5%. So 9 extra years and 75% below the target. The capacity isn’t there much less consumers aren’t fully convinced as range anxiety is a big problem.

10) charging infrastructure is woefully inadequate. Await another taxpayer dollar waste-fest. Think NBN Mark II on rolling EV chargers out nationwide. The question then becomes one of fast charger units which cost 5x more than slower systems. If the base-load power capacity is already at breaking point across many states (Vic & SA the worst) throwing more EVs onto a grid will compound the problem and drive prices up and potentially force rationing although people look to Norway.

Norway is a poor example to benchmark against. It is 5% of our land mass, 1/5th our population and new car sales around 12% of Australia. According to BITRE, Australia has 877,561km of road network which is 9x larger than Norway.

Norway has around 8,000 chargers countrywide. Installation of fast chargers runs around A$60,000 per unit on top of the $100,000 preparation of each station for the high load 480V transformer setup to cope with the increased loads.

Norway state enterprise, Enova, said it would install fast chargers every 50km of 7,500km worth of main road/highway.

Australia has 234,820km of highways/main roads. Fast chargers at every 50km like the Norwegians would require a minimum of 4,700 charging stations across Australia. Norway commits to a minimum of 2 fast chargers and 2 standard chargers per station.

The problem is our plan for 570,000 cars per annum is 10x the number of EVs sold in Norway, requiring 10x the infrastructure.

While it is safe to assume that Norway’s stock of electric cars grows, our cumulative sales on achieving plan would require far greater numbers. So let’s do the maths (note this doesn’t take into account the infrastructure issues of rural areas):

14,700 stations x $100,000 per station to = $1,470,000,000

4,700 stations x 20 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $5,640,000,000 (rural)

4,700 stations x 20 slow chargers @ A$9,000 = $846,000,000 (rural)

10,000 stations x 5 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $3,000,000,000 (urban)

570,000 home charging stations @ $5,500 per set = $3,135,000,000 (this is just for 2035)

Grand Total: A$14,091,000,000

A tip against the Pacific gratuity

ScoMo.png

If we are to be realistic,  $500m doesn’t buy us a thing in the Pacific Islands. No political influence. No loyalty. No defence against China. Apart from the fact that Australia’s emissions add up to 0.0000134% of global CO2, our ability to prevent sea levels rising (which aren’t happening anyway – refer CM report here) is absolutely zero. If Australia offered the islands a fraction of the $9.5bn we spend on renewables annually in return for all the coal-fired power we wanted, these islands would be silly to refuse the deal. Most likely they wouldn’t.

In September 2018, Australia was beaten over the head for not helping the Pacific Islands cope with the dangers of climate change. What better way for PNG to have averted the climate emergency by using part of the $150mn in aid money from Australia to buy 40 gas-guzzling Maserati sports limousines from Italy?

Actions not words. The $500m reminds CM of those investment banks that only partially invested in their franchises. They all failed. If there is no strategy, best not spending a cent. $500m is pointless and that won’t be lost on the Pacific Island governments. If PM Morrison wants to buy influence, he needs to think beyond this measly gratuity.

What have these Island nations said to China? China makes up 45% of global coal power gen capacity. Australia 1.6%. China has another 100+ currently under construction and another 76 yet to break ground. So why haven’t they raised hell in Beijing? Because Australia fold to this ridiculous pandering.

73 days to drop fossil fuels

73 days? CM thought we had 12 years. If that’s the outcome then it’s time to party hard. Well 73 days actually equates to the upcoming national election in Canada although Canadian Green’s leader Elizabeth May has made the bold prediction that unless Canada transitions off fossil fuels by the election date it faces unsafe levels of heat and a climate catastrophe.

Will Canadians be so afraid of heat that they’ll vote in such lunacy given the overwhelming drubbings handed out to parties with a “carbon” agenda in provinces like Alberta and Ontario?

The only hot air Canadians need worry about is that coming from her mouth.