The anti-windfarm movement is coming to Canberra, with Alan Jones at its head

By 16 June, 2013 99

Yep, as reported in the Canberra Times, Well, the nutcases are coming to Canberra this coming Tuesday: “This week an anti-wind farm rally will be hosted in Canberra by controversial radio broadcaster Alan Jones.”

Getup will be hosting a counter-rally on Tuesday, noon, at Garema Place.

It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests.

Hope to see lots of us there – but I would be particularly impressed if we were joined by both Kate Lundy and Gary Humphries!

(Note: I’m not an organiser or anything, just a concerned citizen)

Please login to post your comments
99 Responses to The anti-windfarm movement is coming to Canberra, with Alan Jones at its head
#1
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:12 pm, 16 Jun 13

Yar saw this on my Facebook feed from get up.

Gross. Alan jones needs to stay away.

#2
Ado9:22 pm, 16 Jun 13

I suspect the AFP will stop 2,000 of Alan’s supporters at the border again….

#3
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:53 pm, 16 Jun 13

Ado said :

I suspect the AFP will stop 2,000 of Alan’s supporters at the border again….

Haha yep.

At least it won’t be a complete wasted trip for him. He may get to make use of the Dickson public toilets Grimm was telling us all about.

#4
justin heywood10:45 pm, 16 Jun 13

‘….It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests.”

Opposition to Windfarms is another evil Tory plot now?

The Greens have opposed Windfarms in the past, when it suited them politically (look it up). As do such rabid know-nothing conservatives as James Lovelock.

I’m no fan of Jones, and I actually like wind farms. Can’t stand hypocrisy though.

#5
Rawhide Kid Part311:10 pm, 16 Jun 13

Dam! Here we go again. Same tactics different gripe.

#6
p16:43 am, 17 Jun 13

I can’t quite define the anti wind farm mob. Are they hippies that think the big fans blow the wind away and kill flying squirrels? Or are they down to earth working Aussies from the bush who are getting wind turbine syndrome missing out on the cash their neighbours are getting?

#7
miz7:46 am, 17 Jun 13

Apart from Alan Jones being a doofus that someone should ‘put in a chaff bag and chuck out to sea’, I would not like a wind farm next door – it would change the whole microclimate dynamic. And the UK experience shows that it is not only not anywhere near as ‘green’ as touted but also, the consumer pays through the nose for it: see
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10121584/Wind-power-has-failed-to-deliver-what-it-promised.html

#8
IrishPete8:14 am, 17 Jun 13

miz said :

Apart from Alan Jones being a doofus that someone should ‘put in a chaff bag and chuck out to sea’, I would not like a wind farm next door – it would change the whole microclimate dynamic. And the UK experience shows that it is not only not anywhere near as ‘green’ as touted but also, the consumer pays through the nose for it: see
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10121584/Wind-power-has-failed-to-deliver-what-it-promised.html

Sorry but I am not even going to click on a link to an article in the English Daily Telegraph about anything remotely environmental. No good can come of it.

IP

#9
Kim F8:22 am, 17 Jun 13

But Alan Jones IS a wind farm!

#10
neanderthalsis8:39 am, 17 Jun 13

It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests.

Wind farming is integral to the renewable energy policies of the Libs. There has been a policy push from one of the States to restrict windfarm locations, making them no closer than 2km from dwellings, but there is no policy against them.

There are a few Libs, just like there is a few ALP members, Greens, DLPs and all-sorts who oppose them on health grounds or because they might whack the occasional parrot.

Some folk just seem to think that any anti-greenish push is a Mad Monk conspiracy.

#11
dungfungus9:40 am, 17 Jun 13

neanderthalsis said :

It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests.

Wind farming is integral to the renewable energy policies of the Libs. There has been a policy push from one of the States to restrict windfarm locations, making them no closer than 2km from dwellings, but there is no policy against them.

There are a few Libs, just like there is a few ALP members, Greens, DLPs and all-sorts who oppose them on health grounds or because they might whack the occasional parrot.

Some folk just seem to think that any anti-greenish push is a Mad Monk conspiracy.

“Mad Monk”?
What the hell are you talking about?
Who is this “Mad Monk” person?

#12
Gungahlin Al9:43 am, 17 Jun 13

Kim F said :

But Alan Jones IS a wind farm!

Bwahahahaha! Might put that on a plackard and take it along tomorrow!

#13
Baggy9:46 am, 17 Jun 13

Try looking into neodymium mining and tell me that wind turbines are green.

Besides, until they regularly make efficient (>35%) affordable wind turbines then they’re a waste in my opinion.

#14
Solidarity10:13 am, 17 Jun 13

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

#15
Grail10:23 am, 17 Jun 13

Baggy said :

Try looking into neodymium mining and tell me that wind turbines are green.

Besides, until they regularly make efficient (>35%) affordable wind turbines then they’re a waste in my opinion.

Thankfully alternators don’t use magnets! So no neodymium alloy magnets in alternator based wind turbines such as those produced by Enercon: http://www.enercon.de/en-en/753.htm

#16
Grail10:25 am, 17 Jun 13

Solidarity said :

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

I am happy to have a nuke plant in my town if you can find someone happy to have the nuclear waste in their town (but that can’t be my town, or connected to my town by geography, geology, water flows, artesian basins, continental drift, fault lines or wind).

#17
howeph10:30 am, 17 Jun 13

Baggy said :

Try looking into neodymium mining and tell me that wind turbines are green.

So I had a quick look:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium – used, amongst other things, to make high-strength neodymium magnets – powerful permanent magnets – used in wind turbines among other things (e.g. hard disk drives, Dyson vacuum cleaners, etc)

But I think the problem you are trying to refer to is:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html

But this is not a problem with wind turbines per se; it is a problem with China’s poor environment regulation record. They have a similar or maybe worse record with coal mining, so what’s your point?

Baggy said :

Besides, until they regularly make efficient (>35%) affordable wind turbines then they’re a waste in my opinion.

I don’t think that efficiency is the most important factor; cost per MWh of energy produced is what determines if they are economically viable.

E.g. a power source could be 99.999% efficient but if it costs a trillion dollars and only makes enough energy to light a single light bulb then no one would bother about it.

According to analysis from research firm Bloomberg New Energy Finance:

“The study shows that electricity can be supplied from a new wind farm at a cost of AUD 80/MWh (USD 83), compared to AUD 143/MWh from a new coal plant or AUD 116/MWh from a new baseload gas plant, including the cost of emissions under the Gillard government’s carbon pricing scheme. However even without a carbon price (the most efficient way to reduce economy-wide emissions) wind energy is 14% cheaper than new coal and 18% cheaper than new gas.”
[http://about.bnef.com/press-releases/renewable-energy-now-cheaper-than-new-fossil-fuels-in-australia/]

#18
DrKoresh10:30 am, 17 Jun 13

Grail said :

Solidarity said :

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

I am happy to have a nuke plant in my town if you can find someone happy to have the nuclear waste in their town (but that can’t be my town, or connected to my town by geography, geology, water flows, artesian basins, continental drift, fault lines or wind).

The amount of waste produced by a nuclear plant is pretty small. and the best place for it is deep, deep underground. We could ship it all out west and stick it in old mine shafts.

#19
dungfungus10:33 am, 17 Jun 13

Grail said :

Solidarity said :

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

I am happy to have a nuke plant in my town if you can find someone happy to have the nuclear waste in their town (but that can’t be my town, or connected to my town by geography, geology, water flows, artesian basins, continental drift, fault lines or wind).

Radioactive waste from some nuclear medicine treatments are already being flushed through our sewers.

#20
howeph10:35 am, 17 Jun 13

Solidarity said :

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

No, nuclear is the most expensive option. Nobody (except governments who want the capability to make nuclear bombs) will lend the money to invest in nuclear power. Nuclear is just not economically viable – no need to even look at the environmental issues.

#21
howeph11:29 am, 17 Jun 13

justin heywood said :

‘….It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests.”

Opposition to Windfarms is another evil Tory plot now?

The Greens have opposed Windfarms in the past, when it suited them politically (look it up). As do such rabid know-nothing conservatives as James Lovelock.

I’m no fan of Jones, and I actually like wind farms. Can’t stand hypocrisy though.

I can’t stand hypocrisy either, but I don’t see it here.

The following political speakers will be at the anti-wind event:

– Senator John Madigan [Labor]
– Senator Nick Xenophon [Independent]
– MP Alby Schultz [Liberal]
– MP Craig Kelly [Liberal]
– Senator Chris Back [Liberal]

(3 Liberal, 1 Labor, 1 Independent)

The coalition does not have a good track record on renewables policy:

* The Liberal party rolled their leader over the planned introduction of a market mechanism to help address climate change by making fossil fules more expensive compared to renewables.

* Current Liberal party policy is to repeal the carbon tax and shut down the $10b Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

* It is unclear what the coalition will do to the Renewable Energy Target (RET). The Liberal party is under significant pressure from the Liberal state governments and utilities companies to dilute the target in order to maintain the profits and value of the existing coal and gas operations. The Coalition is in favour of yet another review of the RET and has expressed sympathy for the argument that the target should be diluted (the science of course argues that the current target is already too low).

All of the above is coalition policy that doesn’t support renewables. Therefore I don’t think that the claim “It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests” is hypocritical.

#22
pierce12:07 pm, 17 Jun 13

Senator John Madigan is from the DLP, not the ALP – completely different party for more than 50 years.

#23
neanderthalsis1:23 pm, 17 Jun 13

howeph said :

justin heywood said :

-
The coalition does not have a good track record on renewables policy:

* The Liberal party rolled their leader over the planned introduction of a market mechanism to help address climate change by making fossil fules more expensive compared to renewables.

* Current Liberal party policy is to repeal the carbon tax and shut down the $10b Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

* It is unclear what the coalition will do to the Renewable Energy Target (RET). The Liberal party is under significant pressure from the Liberal state governments and utilities companies to dilute the target in order to maintain the profits and value of the existing coal and gas operations. The Coalition is in favour of yet another review of the RET and has expressed sympathy for the argument that the target should be diluted (the science of course argues that the current target is already too low).

All of the above is coalition policy that doesn’t support renewables. Therefore I don’t think that the claim “It would be nice to give the Coalition the message that they should stick to the science and support wind farming rather than bowing to scare campaigns and corporate interests” is hypocritical.

The Axe the Tax policy does not have “and axe wind farms” as the subheading. We seem to have reached a point in the national debate where opposition to the carbon tax make you a flat earth believing climate denier who kicks baby fur seals for enjoyment and steals lollies from children.

There is no coalition policy to remove renewables, in fact, part of the Direct Action policy is to provide incentives for generators to move to renewables. Now I personally think that Direct Action is a load of old bollocks as a meaningful environmental policy but there are some aspects of it, which if combined with some aspects of the ALP policy, would make a sensible policy platform.

#24
EvanJames2:19 pm, 17 Jun 13

People with no prospect of having a wind farm near them tend to be more fervently in favour of the farms, than those who might have to live next to one. I keep wondering, since there are apparently no health concerns with wind farms, why they aren’t building them next to the cities, where most of the electricity ends up?

The low-frequency noise issue is still there. They keep commissioning studies to say that there’s no problems with that, yet we also know that low-frequency noise can cause significant issues, and it’s troubling.

There’s a monster wind development in planning which hasn’t been widely publicised yet, from approximately Lake Bathurst (where the Tarago one stops) through to near Braidwood. I hate that Alan Jones has hung his rabble-rousing hat on this issue, as there are real concerns here and having him around just clouds the issue.

#25
howeph2:20 pm, 17 Jun 13

pierce said :

Senator John Madigan is from the DLP, not the ALP – completely different party for more than 50 years.

Sorry, My bad. Thanks for that.

So all the speakers, with the exception of Nick Xenophon represent conservative parties.

#26
dungfungus2:34 pm, 17 Jun 13

howeph said :

pierce said :

Senator John Madigan is from the DLP, not the ALP – completely different party for more than 50 years.

Sorry, My bad. Thanks for that.

So all the speakers, with the exception of Nick Xenophon represent conservative parties.

What does the “L” stand for in DLP?

#27
dungfungus2:45 pm, 17 Jun 13

EvanJames said :

People with no prospect of having a wind farm near them tend to be more fervently in favour of the farms, than those who might have to live next to one. I keep wondering, since there are apparently no health concerns with wind farms, why they aren’t building them next to the cities, where most of the electricity ends up?

The low-frequency noise issue is still there. They keep commissioning studies to say that there’s no problems with that, yet we also know that low-frequency noise can cause significant issues, and it’s troubling.

There’s a monster wind development in planning which hasn’t been widely publicised yet, from approximately Lake Bathurst (where the Tarago one stops) through to near Braidwood. I hate that Alan Jones has hung his rabble-rousing hat on this issue, as there are real concerns here and having him around just clouds the issue.

You can tell where the wind farms are next going to be built as real estate activity suddenly picks up. It’s hard to sell a hobby farm with “sweeping views across Lake George to delightfully picturesque bird blenders” as part of the spin.
I agree that the bird wind turbines should be built in the cities then they could be called “wind factories”, after all, they have contributed nothing to primary production despite being sited mainly in sheep paddocks.

#28
howeph2:50 pm, 17 Jun 13

neanderthalsis said :

The Axe the Tax policy does not have “and axe wind farms” as the subheading.

I’m not saying that the “axe the tax” policy does directly mean “and axe the wind farms”.

But it is the carbon tax that raises the $10 billion worth of funds to the very important Clean Energy Corporation. The Clean Energy Corporation invests this money in renewables. The Coalition will abolish it and replace it with their pathetic Direct Action plan (which we don’t know how it will be funded).

neanderthalsis said :

We seem to have reached a point in the national debate where opposition to the carbon tax make you a flat earth believing climate denier who kicks baby fur seals for enjoyment and steals lollies from children.

If you oppose the carbon tax then you have to provide a credible description of an alternative method to a) provide market incentives to reduce CO2 emissions; and b) raise the money needed for the other direct action required to transform our energy systems, in a very short time, that we and the rest of the world must do in order to avoid catastrophic climate change.

The coalition has failed to provide an alternative. As you say their Direct Action policy is a joke. One can only conclude that the coalition also thinks, despite their unanimous vote in support of the science, that climate change is also a joke.

The campaign against wind farms is just a part of an ongoing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) campaign been conducted to protect the interests of those who currently benefit from the status quo.

#29
Solidarity2:53 pm, 17 Jun 13

howeph said :

Solidarity said :

Can we just get a nuclear power plant up and running and be done with it?

No, nuclear is the most expensive option. Nobody (except governments who want the capability to make nuclear bombs) will lend the money to invest in nuclear power. Nuclear is just not economically viable – no need to even look at the environmental issues.

There is no other choice. Coal and gas won’t be around forever, and with power required…. we have no real choice.

#30
howeph2:56 pm, 17 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

What does the “L” stand for in DLP?

Same word different smell.

DLP is a conservative party, while the ALP thinks it is a progressive party.

Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP
Advertisement

Halloween in Australia?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.