Quote:
Originally Posted by Renato1
That huge amount of money that was spent on wind farms hasn't actually much reduced the use of coal generated power at all - it can't. Gas fired stations could reduce the usage of fossil fuels because they can be turned off when renewables pump in power at peak periods.
Regards,
Renato
|
Ah yes, Gas, the affordable option. Even though we have massive reserves, most of them are owned by big corporations, thanks to the economic rationalists in the twit pen, and it's being sold overseas faster than they can extract it, all in the name of the mighty buck, of course.
Our resources, sold to the highest bidder and the poor mugs that used to own it, US, will be paying up to 4 times what it costs to extract. Why? Cos Asia wants ever more energy and they cant do it themselves. So, imagine how the public would react to a 400% increase in their power bill if we relied on Renato's gas?? Of course, Asia may want the gas because its a bit less polluting than coal
The same economic rationalists push for coal seam gas ramp up to increase supply, but disregard the devastation it will probably do to the aquifers that supply our drinking water... amongst other things. Of course, once again, its a finite and highly polluting resource... but the environment and climate are "externalities", and therefore irrelevant.
"Renewables - Death Knell". Yeah right! Those in the twit pen seem frantic to sell as much of our resources overseas as fast as they can, and wonder why Aussies want to use renewable sources of energy.
Ultimately, Hockey Puck will want to tax sunlight I suspect. We seem to have an over abundance of it after all ... No, No, I stand corrected, "No new taxes", remember?
