Thursday, 26 October 2017

Real air pollution is slowing China's token attempt to slow FAKE CO2 "pollution."

Beijing on a good day.
Remember China's promise to the Paris Accord was too keep increasing their CO2 emissions until 2030 (link)
Under that treaty, “China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years – 13,” and “be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants...."
From China's official  UNFCCC submission to the Paris Accord: (link)
 China has nationally determined its actions by 2030 as follows: 
 To achieve the peaking of carbon dioxide emissions around 2030 and making best efforts to peak early;  


China makes many of the world's Solar Panels. (linkChina has leapfrogged from nursing a tiny, rural-oriented solar program in the 1990s to become the globe’s leader in what may soon be the world’s largest renewable energy source. (link) And now, China is the world’s largest solar power producer. (Link

By the end of 2016, China’s capacity hit 77.42 gigawatts, and while this is great in terms of raw numbers, it’s a lot less impressive relative to the country’s massive population. 
As it stands, solar energy represents only one percent of the country’s energy output.  (link)
However, as Michael Bastach reports in the Daily Caller 

China’s air pollution problem is hurting the country’s green energy goals, according to a new study. 
Aerosols resulting from power plants and motor vehicles may be blocking out sunlight and reducing solar power output as much as 35 percent in China’s northern and eastern industrial zones, according to a Princeton University study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 
Chinese officials have taken the country’s pollution problems more seriously in recent years as economic growth wanes.  (bold added)
Of course they are talking of real pollution, -air pollution- not the FAKE CO2 pollution. As the US EPA defined it:
Air pollution comes from many different sources such as factories, power plants, dry cleaners, cars, buses, trucks and even windblown dust and wildfires. Air pollution can threaten the health of human beings, trees, lakes, crops, and animals...
Everyone knows that CO2 is colourless, invisible and essential to life on Earth.

So real air pollution is slowing China's token attempt to slow FAKE CO2 "pollution."

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

FOLLOW-UP OPEN LETTER to Minister Frydenberg and MPs.

The Devil is in the details.
From Dr. Michael Crawford

Hon. Josh Frydenberg MP
Minister for the Environment & Energy PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

25th October 2017

Open letter re your stated intention to abolish all taxes and subsidies from electricity

Like many people I have been looking for actual details of your Government’s new plan for electricity security and affordability, and how it will actually work.

I had found plenty of platitudes, media speculation, and wild hopes, but the detail was not apparent and, as I am sure you know, “the devil is in the detail”.

Then I came across the transcript of the press conference held by you and the Prime Minister on 17th October and finally some critical detail, though hidden away in a mass of otherwise vague statements.

You said, and your words are verbatim from the transcript on the Prime Minister’s website:
“This is a credible, workable, pro-market policy that delivers lower electricity prices.
It means no subsidies, no taxes, no trading systems.”
I have to admit that “no subsidies, no taxes” is quite specific and I applaud it.

And supporting your policy statement, the Prime Minister then said:
“This is one of the important things to recognise and it is widely acknowledged and, indeed, claimed by the wind and solar industry that they are now competitive with new builds of thermal power. 
So there is no need for a subsidy. In other words, they can compete on a level playing field.”
That leads to the critical question. When will you be introducing legislation into Parliament to abolish the Federal tax on electricity in the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000? That is the tax which is imposed under the Act if electricity retailers do not buy a certain amount of energy from renewable sources, with that tax falling on electricity consumers.

As you are undoubtedly aware, that tax drives the most oppressive of the subsidies which consumers are forced to pay in their electricity bills.

The statement you made at that press conference would be false, even a lie, unless you intend to repeal Part 4 of the Act – in which case you may as well abolish the whole Act. After all, according to the words of the Prime Minister at that press conference, it is now wholly unnecessary in order to make wind and solar power competitive with thermal power.

Removal of the tax imposed by Part 4 of the Act will also cause an instant drop in subsidies and that will immediately start to flow through to consumers and businesses in reduced electricity prices. Every day of delay is a day when electricity consumers are forced to pay excessive electricity prices, so I urge haste.

I appreciate that the ALP and Greens will bitterly resist this in the Senate. After all, they have a well demonstrated desire to shower subsidies, paid for by electricity consumers, on their mates in the wind and solar power industries.

But take it to the electorate. Give the people the opportunity to vote on your policy to immediately remove all taxes on electricity and all subsidies paid directly or indirectly by electricity consumers and you will have an overwhelming victory. The public will start to see their electricity prices fall now, not in a decade.

So I would appreciate your early advice as to when you will be introducing into Parliament the legislation to abolish Part 4 of the Act, or repeal the Act entirely, so as to forthwith remove all taxes on electricity and remove all subsidies.

Dr Michael Crawford
(email redacted)

cc: Members of Australian Parliament and other interested parties

Saturday, 21 October 2017

Peer Review? Pal Review? Is it worth a cracker?

Your Aussie Climate Sceptics blogger attended the launch of the IPA's book, edited by Jennifer Marohasy, CLIMATE CHANGE THE FACTS 2017.

The full launch can be watched on this YouTube Presentation.

Your blogger can be seen at the bottom left of this frame:

taking this snap:

This blog considers that the peer review process has been contaminated by "PAL" review. However, Professor Peter Ridd defended the process in this YouTube presentation.


When IPA’s Simon Breheny casts doubt on Peer Review, Prof Peter Ridd at first leaps to the defence of Peer Review by saying: 
“No. Peer review is a great start. Right? It's a great (unheard) first check. But then, if only you are going to spend a lot of cash on it, then you need to do more. Right? That’s what companies do.” 
Peter then tells a story about a scientist inventing a new metal for jet engines. Pollies ( or are they Wallies?) would accept the science. However Rolls Royce, or whoever, would test the theory.
Peter: “Scientist have not an idea about quality assurance, but the engineers do.
…And I’m a scientist, OK?”

Wednesday, 18 October 2017

OPEN LETTER to Minister Josh Frydenberg and MPs.

Hon. Josh Frydenberg MP                                                                              18th October 2017
Minister for the Environment & Energy PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600


Open letter re your Monty Pythonesque electricity plan

I understand you have devised an ingenious plan to rectify the current government-directed destruction of our once reliable and affordable power system. According to media reports, your scheme will require electricity retailers to do essentially what they are currently doing, while the “renewable” rorters do what they are currently doing, and electricity distributors continue to do what they are currently doing.

Despite the fact that everyone will be continuing as at present (except of course that we will now pay for some more government officials to oversee this plan, and for some more bandaids), I understand that you and the Prime Minister are confident that electricity prices will fall in maybe ten years time, by a paltry amount, and the lights will stay on because you have willed it so.

Could you please clarify whether your advisers got the script for this plan from Monty Python or from Blackadder. Attribution should go to the right source.

I understand the crux of your ingenious scheme is that retailers will be obliged to purchase at least 1MW of electricity from baseload sources for each 1MW of unreliable (i.e. wind and solar) electricity they purchase. What exactly do you think they are doing at present?

Dr Finkel’s report was grossly misleading in multiple ways. However, he did provide some basic facts pertinent to your plan. On p. 87 of his report, he noted that “In FY2016, 76 per cent of electricity produced in the NEM came from coal-fired generators.”

So the ratio of electricity from coal-fired baseload sources to all other sources was 3:1 in 2016 – and those other sources included gas and legacy hydro. Dr Finkel’s projections (Figure 3.8 in his report) are for the ratio of baseload to intermittent sources to be 3:1 in 2020 and 1.5:1 in 2030 under his Big Lie “Clean” Energy Target, and 2:1 in 2030 under current arrangements.

Consequently, your mandated 1MW:1MW requirement would make no difference to the behaviour of wholesale purchasers of electricity in the immediate future and indeed for decades. Consequently it will not deter the “renewable energy” rorters from building more unreliable, intermittent power stations causing increased variability across the grid and more expensive power which your government forces electricity consumers to purchase.

Your ingenious plan demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how the introduction of intermittent power generation has created system unreliability and doubled real electricity prices in Australia, and how it will continue to do so.

In short:
  • Intermittent wind and solar is highly expensive electricity, requiring the combination of high wholesale prices plus LRET subsidies (paid by consumers) of a roughly similar amount, to make them viable.
  • Because of the subsidies and the nature of the NEM, subsidised generators are able to always place their output into the grid, at the expense of baseload generators, with the latter then being turned into intermittent generators – not because of any deficiency on their part but because they keep getting shut out of the grid on an intermittent and unpredictable basis.
  • Since they are thus prevented from operating at full capacity, baseload generators then also require high prices per MWH in order to be viable, and those necessary prices increase as the intermittency forced on them increases.
  • Given that the proportion of intermittent generators is continuing to increase under your policy, and thus also the intermittency forced onto baseload generators, and given Australian government is driven by irrational ideology, no independent party will invest in new baseload plant or in the refurbishment of existing plant.
  • Wind and solar generators are not just intermittent, they also fail to provide the frequency control and other functions essential to a widespread grid and which are an intrinsic part of baseload generators. Thus the increasing proportion of intermittent generators also adds increasing instability to the grid.
  • Because of the multiplicity of intermittent generators mushrooming around the country, much more transmission infrastructure is required. Each of those generators requires an expensive substation to convert its output into a form suitable for the grid, plus new transmission links. The cost of this comes out of the pockets of electricity consumers.
  • Many members of the public have responded to your high electricity prices (and in many cases encouraged by government subsidies) by placing solar panels on their roofs. Most of them remain connected to the grid because they also want electricity at night (adequate battery storage is very expensive) which cannot come from solar farms, and only sometimes will it come from wind farms, so you need additional investment (either legacy baseload or new gas-fired installations) to back up those private investments. All that investment has to be paid for by end-users. In addition, local distribution networks have consequent less demand on them, so their owners are requiring increased per household connection charges to meet their costs.
  • You and previous governments have produced a Rube Goldberg structure of government agencies to oversee the NEM, which have destroyed affordable and reliable electricity, and whose failure is rewarded with expansion. In addition, you have duplicated at the national level government officials that once existed only at state level. Electricity consumers and taxpayers pay for this mess.
  • The financial sector has got in the act offering hedging instruments so various parties can cope with the financial uncertainty caused by this system, uncertainty we never had before the NEM and intermittent power. The financial sector employs people and capital to provide those hedging instruments. That is a real cost which again ultimately comes out of the pockets of electricity consumers.
  • Where once electricity in each state was produced by a state government responsible to its electorate, it is now produced by an unscrupulous oligopoly whose members use every tactic they can to game the fake market Australian governments have created and thereby add further costs to consumers in order to pad the profits of their largely foreign owners.

As I pointed out in an earlier letter to you, this complex mess over which you are presiding and which you refuse to correct is costing the Australian community an excess and wholly unnecessary cost of between $30Bn and $50Bn per annum. Yes, that is measured in tens of billions of dollars each year. It is increasing each year and it is destroying tens of thousands of jobs.

Despite that knowledge, while presiding over a system where real consumer electricity prices are now twice what they were before your NEM started, you insult the Australian people by claiming you’ll deliver them a reduction of less than 5% in maybe a decade’s time, when you will be long gone from office. In other words you are telling them the country will have to suffer unaffordable power prices now and for decades – because you and the Prime Minister are too gutless or incompetent to fix it.

And all of this is done supposedly to limit the beneficial trace-gas carbon dioxide, despite your Chief Scientist having testified to the Senate that totally abolishing Australia’s emissions of carbon dioxide would make virtually no difference to the world’s climate.

More of the detail behind these points is explained in my letter to you re AEMO’s recent misleading advice to you and in my open letter to Dr Finkel, of which you also have a copy.

I pointed out previously what is now being commonly recognised. There is only one way to restore affordable, secure electricity to Australia and its citizens. It has two parts:
  • Abolish now all subsidies for particular forms of electricity supply. That means the RET-based subsidies for wind and solar in particular but also the various other forms like preferential funding for intermittent power generators.
  • Offer long-term government contracts for low cost dispatchable electricity supply which is also able to provide the other characteristics needed for stable supply (e.g. frequency control) sufficient to meet Australia’s electricity requirements with the safety margin we once enjoyed.
If you do not understand that, you are too clueless to be worth feeding. If you do understand it, then the policies you are following are outright treachery against Australia and its people – and all the Liberal and National party members who support this treachery are also culpable.

Dr Michael Crawford

(email address redacted)
cc: Members of Australian Parliament and other interested parties

Monday, 16 October 2017

CO2 - an essential plant nutrient.

The terrestrial biosphere is flourishing, all across the globe plant life is booming and thriving, deserts are shrinking, forests are expanding and crop yields are consistently reaching new heights.

What force is responsible for this incredible stimulation?

The answer is CO2 - an essential plant nutrient.

Sunday, 15 October 2017

NASA: Sea levels falling

Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global warming: the added water from melting ice sheets and glaciers and the expansion of sea water as it warms. 

So, as sea level has been falling for the last two years, does that imply the reverse?  Do we have global cooling adding ice to ice sheets and cooling oceans?

H/t Ice Age Now

Saturday, 14 October 2017

Tony Abbott's GWPF Address: 9/10/2017 - "Daring to Doubt

The 2017 Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) annual lecture delivered by the 28th Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott in London on the 9th October, 2017.
Abbott points out the sheer futility of the billions of dollars being wasted on climate policies in Australia.
"Palaeontology indicates that over millions of years there have been warmer periods and cooler periods that don’t correlate with carbon dioxide concentrations. The Jurassic warm period and the ice ages occurred without any human contribution at all. The medieval warm period when crops were grown in Greenland and the mini-ice age when the Thames froze over occurred well before industrial activities added to atmospheric carbon dioxide. 
Prudence and respect for the planet would suggest taking care not lightly to increase carbon dioxide emissions; but the evidence suggests that other factors such as sun spot cycles and oscillations in the Earth’s orbit are at least as important for climate change as this trace gas – which, far from being pollution, is actually essential for life to exist. 
Certainly, no big change has accompanied the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration over the past century from roughly 300 to roughly 400 parts per million or from 0.03 to 0.04 per cent."

For the full text of this address, go HERE.

“Lights Out”

The Carbon Sense Newsletter, October 2017.
To view or print the whole newsletter plus images click: 

By Viv Forbes (words) and Steve Hunter (illustrations)

For yonks they waged a war on coal
And painted miners black;
They threw explorers on the dole
And shut the gates outback.

The land was closed to oil and gas
And nukes were always banned;
While wind and sun got all the brass
And uglified the land.
Poles and turbines all in ranks
Sprouted on the hills;
The carbon credits pleased the banks
And households got the bills.

Then all the factories fled offshore
As puny power flickered;
More jobs were lost for evermore
As politicians dickered.
Then one still night the lights went out
And blackouts stalked the land;
The pollies quickly turned about
And Greens were spurned and banned.
To view or print the whole newsletter plus images click:

Viv Forbes
vforbes@carbon-sense.comWashpool   Qld Australia

“Daring to Doubt” 
by Tony Abbott:
“Climate change is by no means the sole or even the most significant symptom of the changing interests and values of the West. Still, only societies with high levels of cultural amnesia could have made such a religion out of it. Beware the pronouncement, “the science is settled”. It’s the spirit of the Inquisition, the thought-police down the ages. Almost as bad is the claim that “99 per cent of scientists believe” as if scientific truth is determined by votes rather than facts.”Tony Abbott, 2017 Annual GWPF Lecture, London 9 October 2017 

“Escaping the Renewable Energy Trap”
by Alan Moran:

“The Paris Agreement”
by President Donald Trump
What he really said.

Serious Defects in Australia’s Energy Policies
A group of retired senior engineers challenge Australia’s bi-partisan energy foolishness. See:

Thanks to all of those who sent well-wishes on our moving adventure and downsizing of our lives. Some even sent contributions to the depleted Carbon Sense cause.

We are making progress on the shift. As an experienced shifter predicted, we have reached the “where did we put that” stage. 

Next we will be saying – “why did we keep that stuff”.

But our office is now working and more Carbon Sense will flow again. Thanks for your support.

Viv Forbes
12 October,
“Carbon Sense” is an independent newsletter produced for the Carbon Sense Coalition, an Australian based organisation which opposes waste of resources, opposes pollution, opposes the baseless war on carbon fuels and promotes the rational un-subsidised use of all energy resources including coal, oil, gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, solar and geo-thermal.

Literary, financial or other contributions to help our cause are welcomed. 
We get no government grants and unlike many of our opponents, we do not pose as a charity and in fact pay GST and income tax on our operations. We live on subscriptions alone.

For more information visit our web site at
If you would like to keep Carbon Sense operating, send subscriptions to 
Carbon Sense Pty Ltd, by post to the address below, or direct deposit to: 
Acct No: 553 077 331
BSB: 334-040

Please spread “Carbon Sense” around.Authorised by: Viv Forbes, Chairman, 1907 Ipswich-Boonah Road, Washpool Qld 4306 Australia. 

To Unsubscribe send a reply with “Unsubscribe” in the subject line.