The Turnbull Government

[PZ.]

Yes you are right for a change...I did get them mixed up but that does not change anything.

Very true. Everything in post 1519 is correct. Yes I've noticed we are in agreeance.

 

[Tisme]

I have a few statements/queries on the shutdown of Hazelwood power station:

the boss of the private owners slated economic inviability as the reason for the closures;

although the station is owned by ENGIE , the state govt is getting the blame for market forces;

Engies' own mission statement: "The 21st century will mark the end of fossil fuels, which will gradually be replaced by energy from decarbonized renewable resources, such as solar power. (…) Alongside large-scale plants (…), we will see the emergence of a multiplicity of decentralized local generating facilities", ENGIE CEO Isabelle Kocher (Le Monde, May 4, 2016);

the LNP's federal govt saw the end of industry financial support and closure of manufacturing in SA and Vic;

I'm guessing that the viability of the operating a large power station, in a crowded market where manufacturing is dying, might just be the real reason continued loss making ventures like Hazelwood are being closed?

I'm guessing if I ran a codependency analysis on the only two variables : LNP federal policy and Power generation in post industrial Victoria, there would be a convincing correlation.

 

[SirRumpole]

I'm guessing that the viability of the operating a large power station , in a crowded market where manufacturing is dying might just be the real reason continued loss making ventures like Hazelwood are being closed?

I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.

Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?

I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.

 

[Tisme]

I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.

Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?

I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.

I remember thinking how clever the end of the 19th century builders of the railways workshops in WA were, in making it convertible to any war effort. It had its own power station, smelters, etc. I'm sure detente was always a goal, but the practicalities of being an isolated island nation/state in an ocean of barbarian ar5eholes were obviously in need of pragmatic readiness.

I don't see the ocean having changed much, perhaps a rising tide, but our preparedness does seem to have devolved back to hollis bollis dependency mode?

 

[SirRumpole]

I don't see the ocean having changed much, perhaps a rising tide, but our preparedness does seem to have devolved back to hollis bollis dependency mode?

I think it's an increasing desire by politicians to rid themselves of as much responsibility that they can for their bad decisions. If power prices go up then it's now the electricity company's fault not theirs.

Trouble for the pollies is that people will still blame them and vote them out if they don't like utility privatisation.

Trouble for us is that the other side won't promise to buy them back because they don't want the baggage of actually having to make decisions.

 

[Tisme]

I think it's an increasing desire by politicians to rid themselves of as much responsibility that they can for their bad decisions. If power prices go up then it's now the electricity company's fault not theirs.

Trouble for the pollies is that people will still blame them and vote them out if they don't like utility privatisation.

Trouble for us is that the other side won't promise to buy them back because they don't want the baggage of actually having to make decisions.

Politicians flock together in unions by another name. Being union members means they are bound by the party politik. I think if we looked back at various nation building periods there are strong autocratic leaders like Forrest, Curtin, Chifley, Whitlam, Hawke/Keating.... I'm sure their are conservatives in the wannabe mix (e.g. Charles Court), but that would be an oxymoron in conversation.

The last major try was the NBN, which was made a farce by ubiquitous opportunism and bloody mindedness, leading us to the impotent and insipid leadership we have now.

We can only hope for the emergence of a breakout and inspirational teflon warrior come the next poll. ... likely wont happen, but we can dream.

 

[noco]

I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.

Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?

I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.

So if they were state owned and they had to run at a loss, who pays for that loss?

Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?

If the loss is taken up by the Government, then some other important piece of infrastructure has to miss out.

Somebody has to pay in the end

 

[SirRumpole]

Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?

The difference could well be returned to the government by being able to supply cheap power to business and industry and those businesses using those savings to create more employment leading to more GST revenue and income taxes.

 

[Tisme]

So if they were state owned and they had to run at a loss, who pays for that loss?

Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?

If the loss is taken up by the Government, then some other important piece of infrastructure has to miss out.

Somebody has to pay in the end

I would suggest the conversation has moved from simplistic bipolar politics and blame games to whether the viability of privatisation could lead us to a situation of closures, wherein we lack the grunt needed to restart industry after a force majure event.... events that are likely to increase as climate change bites.

Only the govt purse could keep a major power station and its feeder industries in standby mode while securing our defensive capabilities.

 

[noco]

The difference could well be returned to the government by being able to supply cheap power to business and industry and those businesses using those savings to create more employment leading to more GST revenue and income taxes.

Hang on Rumpy, you are talking about the loss difference of state owned coal fired power stations burning coal being returned to the Government?

There will be no savings if the state run power stations have to run at a loss.

I have doubts about the supply of cheap power to business and industry creating more jobs...And where does the GST fit in to all of this? I have doubts about the GST and other income taxes taking up the difference....Perhaps you might try to convince me with some dollars figures to back up your argument....Hearsay certainly does not have any infuence.

We have already observed in South Australia where power prices have risen dramatically reducing business and industry profits which in the end affects job losses......Some business in SA are reconsidering their position in that state since Jay Weathrill has suggested that business and industry install their own power generators which will defeat the purpose of reducing green house gases....Those diesel generators will emit heaps of gases into the air.

 

[SirRumpole]

I have doubts about the supply of cheap power to business and industry creating more jobs...

Well, you seemed keen on Turnbull's business tax cuts creating jobs, surely cuts to operating costs would do that too ? Don't you want businesses to be able to cut their costs ?

 

[noco]

I would suggest the conversation has moved from simplistic bipolar politics and blame games to whether the viability of privatisation could lead us to a situation of closures, wherein we lack the grunt needed to restart industry after a force majure event.... events that are likely to increase as climate change bites.

Only the govt purse could keep a major power station and its feeder industries in standby mode while securing our defensive capabilities.

From what I have learned, it is not possible to have a coal fired power station on stand by mode...Coal fired power stations do take a considerable time from start up to production of power....Coal has to burn to produce steam up to a high pressure to run the turbines and it just cannot happen at the flick of a switch as you believe.

Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.

 

[SirRumpole]

Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.

Conversion efficiency is not the only factor to consider with power generation. Cost of coal + transportation >> cost of wind or sunlight. As for subsidies, coal has been subsidised for decades.

 

[Tisme]

From what I have learned, it is not possible to have a coal fired power station on stand by mode...Coal fired power stations do take a considerable time from start up to production of power....Coal has to burn to produce steam up to a high pressure to run the turbines and it just cannot happen at the flick of a switch as you believe.

Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.

I have experience in building and starting up coal fired power stations. It is true there are long times involved in getting a mothballed facility up to speed, the rolling stock scheduled, water resource secured, the mines crushing, etc which is why it behoves responsible govt to protect it constituents from power failure, especially during transitional technological periods, to have the standby ready; perhaps with some kind of preheating happening.

Unforgiveable getting caught with our pants down because of some idealogical want for all things laissez-faire capitalism, which has had to have feedback boundaries placed on it because of its inherent open loop failures to the majority of the population and nation

 

[noco]

Well, you seemed keen on Turnbull's business tax cuts creating jobs, surely cuts to operating costs would do that too ? Don't you want businesses to be able to cut their costs ?

You seem to be getting things out of context by diverting attention away from the real issue which was about the loss of coal fired power stations and who finally pays for that loss.

On the subject of tax cuts to business it was good policy when Keating reduced the tax burden on business and in recent times it has been supported by Chris Bowen and Bill Shorten.

I would still like to see some facts and figures to back your argument on state owned coal fired power stations running at a loss without diverting to some other issue......But I won't hold my breath waiting.

 

[SirRumpole]

I would still like to see some facts and figures to back your argument on state owned coal fired power stations running at a loss without diverting to some other issue......But I won't hold my breath waiting.

What figures do you want ? Lots of government services run at a loss which we pay for with things called taxes. We pay taxes to have these services available when we need them.

 

[noco]

Conversion efficiency is not the only factor to consider with power generation. Cost of coal + transportation >> cost of wind or sunlight. As for subsidies, coal has been subsidised for decades.

And Danial Andrews tripled the royalties on coal last year to make Hazelwood even less viable.

You have still not answered my question.....Who pays for the loss of running a coal fired power station and I need to see some facts and figures from you back up what you were stating in your post # 1523.
No diversion this time.

Facts and figures please.

 

[Tisme]

And Danial Andrews tripled the royalties on coal last year to make Hazelwood even less viable.

You have still not answered my question.....Who pays for the loss of running a coal fired power station and I need to see some facts and figures from you back up what you were stating in your post # 1523.
No diversion this time.

Facts and figures please.

But the royalty rates are only slightly more than QLD and less than NSW and only $60m/annum increase shared by all coal fired operators in Vic, so how does $15m/annum cripple a major power station that hasn't been maintained to last past the present because it's a dog technology, the owners themselves have identified as surplus to their needs to turn a profit elsewhere with newer first world directions.

 

[Tisme]

50,000 fulltime jobs lost under Malcolm's watch last year. Natural born economic managers?

 

[SirRumpole]

50,000 fulltime jobs lost under Malcolm's watch last year. Natural born economic managers?

It's due to those darn Lefties blocking all his important reforms.