16 June 2013

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

| CapitalIdea
Join the conversation
98

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)

Join the conversation

98
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

pierce said :

As much as I might dislike Alan Jones, I’ve come to the conclusion that bringing up his personal life is pretty tacky…

I agree.

It’s not relevant to the “debate” at hand. There is no need to stoop to that level, in fact it is counter productive.

I’ve always understood a homophobe to be a person who has an irrational fear or hate of homosexuals which would fit in with Alan Jones listeners,quite abhorrent IMO!

johnboy said :

http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/freeman.asp

“I hate the word homophobia. It’s not a phobia. You are not scared. You are an asshole”

Using the words homophobia and asshole in the same statement may not be all that helpful… 🙂

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

pierce said :

As much as I might dislike Alan Jones, I’ve come to the conclusion that bringing up his personal life is pretty tacky, particularly given that it doesn’t appear to conflict with his public statements. (I have better things to do than listen to the man’s show but he isn’t known for an anti-gay stance, to the best of my knowledge)

Most of his listeners are the hugest homophobes you could ever meet.

Exactly what is the problem if a person has a phobia?
I work in the lift game and in the last two weeks, two people have exited a lift I was in as it filled with fellow travelers and excused themselves by stating they were feeling claustrophobic.
Coulrophobes are concerned about clowns ffs.
Why is it a crime to be a homophobe?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/freeman.asp

“I hate the word homophobia. It’s not a phobia. You are not scared. You are an asshole”

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd4:23 pm 19 Jun 13

pierce said :

As much as I might dislike Alan Jones, I’ve come to the conclusion that bringing up his personal life is pretty tacky, particularly given that it doesn’t appear to conflict with his public statements. (I have better things to do than listen to the man’s show but he isn’t known for an anti-gay stance, to the best of my knowledge)

Most of his listeners are the hugest homophobes you could ever meet.

thebrownstreak693:30 pm 19 Jun 13

Jim Jones said :

dph said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Well at least dungfungus has proven three things in this topic:

1) dungfungus does not believe in science

2) dungfungus does not know how to debate

3) dungfungus, instead of using logic, parrots anything Allan jones says.

He’s clearly a graduate of the Allan Jones school of opinions & debate.

1) Ignore fact & or credible scientific research.

2) Present opinion as fact.

3) Yell over the top of anyone who disagrees or tries to use logic.

4) suck a big buncha dix

I think you’ll find the correct term is “eata boxa cox”.

As much as I might dislike Alan Jones, I’ve come to the conclusion that bringing up his personal life is pretty tacky, particularly given that it doesn’t appear to conflict with his public statements. (I have better things to do than listen to the man’s show but he isn’t known for an anti-gay stance, to the best of my knowledge)

dph said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Well at least dungfungus has proven three things in this topic:

1) dungfungus does not believe in science

2) dungfungus does not know how to debate

3) dungfungus, instead of using logic, parrots anything Allan jones says.

He’s clearly a graduate of the Allan Jones school of opinions & debate.

1) Ignore fact & or credible scientific research.

2) Present opinion as fact.

3) Yell over the top of anyone who disagrees or tries to use logic.

4) suck a big buncha dix

dungfungus said :

Coal fired power stations need to be close to coal fields or good bulk transport routes which are rarely found in cities.

Up to the mid-50’s coal fired power stations were in cities. It wasn’t till the development of very high voltage transmission that it became viable to build them next to the coal fields.

dungfungus said :

Wind turbines can be placed almost anywhere (even in the middle of the sea).

Not really. They need to be in areas with high enough wind speeds which discounts putting them in any of the capital cites (except Hobart) and floating wind turbines are still in the development phase.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Well at least dungfungus has proven three things in this topic:

1) dungfungus does not believe in science

2) dungfungus does not know how to debate

3) dungfungus, instead of using logic, parrots anything Allan jones says.

He’s clearly a graduate of the Allan Jones school of opinions & debate.

1) Ignore fact & or credible scientific research.

2) Present opinion as fact.

3) Yell over the top of anyone who disagrees or tries to use logic.

dungfungus said :

miz said :

Mr Evil said: “I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????”
Here’s a summary: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/20/1160851142104.html?page=fullpage

Most events in this homophobic article are about Jones’ past activities.

How, precisely, is the article homophobic?

As for ‘Jones’ past activities’: do you really expect an article published in 2006 to be anything else?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:28 pm 19 Jun 13

Well at least dungfungus has proven three things in this topic:

1) dungfungus does not believe in science

2) dungfungus does not know how to debate

3) dungfungus, instead of using logic, parrots anything Allan jones says.

miz said :

Mr Evil said: “I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????”
Here’s a summary: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/20/1160851142104.html?page=fullpage

Most events in this homophobic article are about Jones’ past activities.

dungfungus said :

IrishPete said :

dungfungus said :

Erg0 said :

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Well, I happen to be allergic to penicillin. Nearly killed me when I was in the Army.

A dungfungus allergic to penicillin? You are kidding, aren’t you? A dungfungus virtually IS penicillin.

Luckily wind turbines will only kill you if you climb them or maybe if you fly a kite near them.

IP

They kill kites also:
http://gigrin.co.uk/w/wind_turbine_kills_kite.html

They also make bats explode. It’s thought the moving blades cause a drop in pressure that makes the delicate lungs of bats suddenly expand, bursting the tissue’s blood vessels.

Bizarre but true.

This must be a dilemma for The Greens. Al?

astrojax said :

i loved mr jones’ comments replayed last night on the radio, that if wind turbines are so harmless they should be in macquarie st (sydney), the location of mr jones’ residence – well, we wouldn’t want a nasty noise polluting turbine among all that silent city environment, so let’s pop a wholesome little coal-fired power plant into your neighbour’s place, shall we? ffs, what a doofus – and he has sway. how???

Coal fired power stations need to be close to coal fields or good bulk transport routes which are rarely found in cities.
Wind turbines can be placed almost anywhere (even in the middle of the sea).

IrishPete said :

dungfungus said :

Erg0 said :

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Well, I happen to be allergic to penicillin. Nearly killed me when I was in the Army.

A dungfungus allergic to penicillin? You are kidding, aren’t you? A dungfungus virtually IS penicillin.

Luckily wind turbines will only kill you if you climb them or maybe if you fly a kite near them.

IP

They kill kites also:
http://gigrin.co.uk/w/wind_turbine_kills_kite.html

i loved mr jones’ comments replayed last night on the radio, that if wind turbines are so harmless they should be in macquarie st (sydney), the location of mr jones’ residence – well, we wouldn’t want a nasty noise polluting turbine among all that silent city environment, so let’s pop a wholesome little coal-fired power plant into your neighbour’s place, shall we? ffs, what a doofus – and he has sway. how???

dungfungus said :

Erg0 said :

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Well, I happen to be allergic to penicillin. Nearly killed me when I was in the Army.

A dungfungus allergic to penicillin? You are kidding, aren’t you? A dungfungus virtually IS penicillin.

Luckily wind turbines will only kill you if you climb them or maybe if you fly a kite near them.

IP

Masquara said :

If wind power is that good, why do the wind companies feel they need such massive taxpayer subsidies? I think it’s likely we’re all being taken for a ride.

I wouldn’t want to live near one of the turbines (the swimming pool filter noise from across the road in my suburb is unpleasant for me, and I expect a nearby turbine is much worse) , and I don’t think the sound of waves on the seashore is necessarily comparable to wind turbine noise.

Given the international $$$ power and PR machinery of these wind turbine companies, I think it’s worth Riotact of all places lending the little hippie guys an ear on this issue.

A pool filter’s noise is a pump, generally an electric motor. A wind turbine is not a motor. I expect the noise to be quite different. It will also be a lot further from anyone’s house than the pool you are talking about.

IP

Mr Evil said: “I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????”
Here’s a summary: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/20/1160851142104.html?page=fullpage

Masquara said :

If wind power is that good, why do the wind companies feel they need such massive taxpayer subsidies? I think it’s likely we’re all being taken for a ride.

I wouldn’t want to live near one of the turbines (the swimming pool filter noise from across the road in my suburb is unpleasant for me, and I expect a nearby turbine is much worse) , and I don’t think the sound of waves on the seashore is necessarily comparable to wind turbine noise.

I agree, Masquara. My God, did I just write that? But what you’ve said makes absolute sense.

Given the international $$$ power and PR machinery of these wind turbine companies, I think it’s worth Riotact of all places lending the little hippie guys an ear on this issue.

Jim Jones said :

Mr Evil said :

Yeah, but as GetUp organised this event, 3/4 of the people there probably had no idea until they arrived in Garema Place what they were actually there to support.

Plus, to be fair, the 100 or so Alan Jones supporters were probably the lucky ones that got through the massive AFP roadblocks on the outskirts of Canberra – so I’m guessing there are at least another 500 000 trapped outside Canberra.

I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????

GENIUS!!!

As a Certified Mythbuster, I declare this one PLAUSIBLE.

dungfungus said :

Erg0 said :

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Well, I happen to be allergic to penicillin. Nearly killed me when I was in the Army.

In that case I’m going to blame the person who invented epinephrine, who you presumably also hate.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd6:04 pm 18 Jun 13

Mr Evil said :

Yeah, but as GetUp organised this event, 3/4 of the people there probably had no idea until they arrived in Garema Place what they were actually there to support.

Plus, to be fair, the 100 or so Alan Jones supporters were probably the lucky ones that got through the massive AFP roadblocks on the outskirts of Canberra – so I’m guessing there are at least another 500 000 trapped outside Canberra.

I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????

😀

Mr Evil said :

Yeah, but as GetUp organised this event, 3/4 of the people there probably had no idea until they arrived in Garema Place what they were actually there to support.

Plus, to be fair, the 100 or so Alan Jones supporters were probably the lucky ones that got through the massive AFP roadblocks on the outskirts of Canberra – so I’m guessing there are at least another 500 000 trapped outside Canberra.

I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????

GENIUS!!!

Yeah, but as GetUp organised this event, 3/4 of the people there probably had no idea until they arrived in Garema Place what they were actually there to support.

Plus, to be fair, the 100 or so Alan Jones supporters were probably the lucky ones that got through the massive AFP roadblocks on the outskirts of Canberra – so I’m guessing there are at least another 500 000 trapped outside Canberra.

I really do wonder sometimes if all the “Aussie Battlers” who support Jones are actually aware of what his favourite activity outside of work involves????

Erg0 said :

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Well, I happen to be allergic to penicillin. Nearly killed me when I was in the Army.

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

You still don’t appear to know how to deal in facts.

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Congratulations. You are officially the stupidest person on the internet.

If wind power is that good, why do the wind companies feel they need such massive taxpayer subsidies? I think it’s likely we’re all being taken for a ride.

I wouldn’t want to live near one of the turbines (the swimming pool filter noise from across the road in my suburb is unpleasant for me, and I expect a nearby turbine is much worse) , and I don’t think the sound of waves on the seashore is necessarily comparable to wind turbine noise.

Given the international $$$ power and PR machinery of these wind turbine companies, I think it’s worth Riotact of all places lending the little hippie guys an ear on this issue.

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Wait, I read somewhere that a scientist invented penicillin. This would be very troubling for me if I only dealt in absolutes.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd4:57 pm 18 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

You still don’t appear to know how to deal in facts.

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

Yes they did, but what does a atomic bomb have to do with this topic?

Gungahlin Al4:46 pm 18 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

FFS. I’m out.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

You still don’t appear to know how to deal in facts.

At the risk of spreading more disinformation I wish to put forward that scientists invented the Atomic Bomb.

howeph said :

But ever since 2007 demand for electricity, from the grid, has be falling http://www.aer.gov.au/node/9765

I like this chart of generating capacity and peak demand. I don’t know who they get to do their forecast but they’re rubbish, worse than no forecast at all.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd4:15 pm 18 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

You still don’t appear to know how to deal in facts.

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

Then keep quiet because your opinions are worthless

dungfungus said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

OH JUST SHUT UP.

Really, have you no idea how terribly tedious and ignorant all this crap is?

Are you really as lacking in self-consciousness as you are in basic intelligence?

Your ‘opinion’ is worthless and ‘disinformation with no science’ in no way implies a double-negative.

JUST … SHUT … UP

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

“disinformation with no science” implies a double negative.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd2:21 pm 18 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

You are not giving opinions, you are trying to spread disinformation with no science and then making points that have zero to do with what is being discussed.

DrKoresh said :

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

I am not going to keep quiet just because my opinions don’t fit with yours.

dungfungus said :

If they are not sold before the wind farms move in they remain unsold – forever (unless the buyer is blind and deaf).

Or the new buyer want to stick windfarms on the property themselves…

dungfungus said :

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

What’s that got to do with anything? If you want to fall back on erroneous logic like poisoning the well then you might as well just keep quiet.

dungfungus said :

Gungahlin Al said :

dungfungus said :

Thank you. I wanted to call-out EvanJames on his pseudoscientific BS, but didn’t have the wherewithal to come-up with anything but “Shut-up, you’re full of it” so I decided to refrain from commenting. I appreciate you providing the evidence I couldn’t.

It is very entertaining following all the scientific arguments presented by so many experts, all garnished with a big dob of ego.

Why this sort of debate is pointless. Because faced with ream after ream of hard scientific debunking, the adherants just invoke personality slurs: ego, “vested interests” (yeah that one’s ironic), conspiracy (even more ironic).

dungfungus said :

Are you prepared to go back to dial-up and leave the NBN at Gungahlin and you will trade light pollution for noise pollution if you live near a wind farm. Maybe a wombat hole is where you need to be.

Wombat hole eh? Can’t debate, so insult…
Happy to trade the NBN. Because NBN Co is building 25/4 Mbps wireless/satellite for everywhere outside the fibred zones. And because I’d like my kids to be able to marvel at the Milky Way, and all it inspires. I note you were unable to furnish any details of these hobby farms going for a song though? #sadface.

Roundhead89 said :

So GetUp is holding a counter demonstration. Their version of a closing down sale, eh? I am looking forward to the climate change era ending on September 14th.

To quote Neil deGrasse Tyson; “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

“unable to furnish any details of these hobby farms going for a song though?”

If they are not sold before the wind farms move in they remain unsold – forever (unless the buyer is blind and deaf).
Remember, a bargain is something you will later regret buying at a price you can afford.
I applaud your wish to have your kids look at the Milky Way without the light intrusions but as long as their is internet connectivity they will choose to play with their iPhones instead.

Gungahlin Al said :

dungfungus said :

Thank you. I wanted to call-out EvanJames on his pseudoscientific BS, but didn’t have the wherewithal to come-up with anything but “Shut-up, you’re full of it” so I decided to refrain from commenting. I appreciate you providing the evidence I couldn’t.

It is very entertaining following all the scientific arguments presented by so many experts, all garnished with a big dob of ego.

Why this sort of debate is pointless. Because faced with ream after ream of hard scientific debunking, the adherants just invoke personality slurs: ego, “vested interests” (yeah that one’s ironic), conspiracy (even more ironic).

dungfungus said :

Are you prepared to go back to dial-up and leave the NBN at Gungahlin and you will trade light pollution for noise pollution if you live near a wind farm. Maybe a wombat hole is where you need to be.

Wombat hole eh? Can’t debate, so insult…
Happy to trade the NBN. Because NBN Co is building 25/4 Mbps wireless/satellite for everywhere outside the fibred zones. And because I’d like my kids to be able to marvel at the Milky Way, and all it inspires. I note you were unable to furnish any details of these hobby farms going for a song though? #sadface.

Roundhead89 said :

So GetUp is holding a counter demonstration. Their version of a closing down sale, eh? I am looking forward to the climate change era ending on September 14th.

To quote Neil deGrasse Tyson; “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”

Thalydamide was invented by a scientist, wasn’t it?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd12:05 pm 18 Jun 13

Roundhead89 said :

So GetUp is holding a counter demonstration. Their version of a closing down sale, eh? I am looking forward to the climate change era ending on September 14th.

Do you enjoy proving how intellectually small you are when you believe jones and abbot over actual science?

Affirmative Action Man said :

Reminds me of the Repetitive Strain Injuries (RSI epidemic of the 80’s. There was no such thing as RSI then some doctors claimed to have diagnosed people with RSI.

I worked with someone who seemed to be in perfectly good health then when RSI hit the headlines she suddenly claimed she had pain in her hands & couldn’t work & put in a compo claim caused by being a telex operator.

Yup, terrible. Just like 100 years ago there was no such thing as domestic abuse and priests never fiddled with kids.

Affirmative Action Man11:38 am 18 Jun 13

Reminds me of the Repetitive Strain Injuries (RSI epidemic of the 80’s. There was no such thing as RSI then some doctors claimed to have diagnosed people with RSI.

I worked with someone who seemed to be in perfectly good health then when RSI hit the headlines she suddenly claimed she had pain in her hands & couldn’t work & put in a compo claim caused by being a telex operator.

Gungahlin Al10:29 am 18 Jun 13

Damn: another quote fail. My fault this time I think. Second paragraph of my last was from Dungfungus not me.

Gungahlin Al10:28 am 18 Jun 13

dungfungus said :

Thank you. I wanted to call-out EvanJames on his pseudoscientific BS, but didn’t have the wherewithal to come-up with anything but “Shut-up, you’re full of it” so I decided to refrain from commenting. I appreciate you providing the evidence I couldn’t.

It is very entertaining following all the scientific arguments presented by so many experts, all garnished with a big dob of ego.

Why this sort of debate is pointless. Because faced with ream after ream of hard scientific debunking, the adherants just invoke personality slurs: ego, “vested interests” (yeah that one’s ironic), conspiracy (even more ironic).

dungfungus said :

Are you prepared to go back to dial-up and leave the NBN at Gungahlin and you will trade light pollution for noise pollution if you live near a wind farm. Maybe a wombat hole is where you need to be.

Wombat hole eh? Can’t debate, so insult…
Happy to trade the NBN. Because NBN Co is building 25/4 Mbps wireless/satellite for everywhere outside the fibred zones. And because I’d like my kids to be able to marvel at the Milky Way, and all it inspires. I note you were unable to furnish any details of these hobby farms going for a song though? #sadface.

Roundhead89 said :

So GetUp is holding a counter demonstration. Their version of a closing down sale, eh? I am looking forward to the climate change era ending on September 14th.

To quote Neil deGrasse Tyson; “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”

DrKoresh said :

thoughtpod said :

Ok, here’s the thing. The science says that the only harm posed by wind-farms is psychsomatic, caused by heavy scare-campaigning causing anxiety-related symptoms. Basically, if someone tells you that something is going to harm you again and again in specific ways, your mind will geenrate the symptoms – sort of a reverse placebo. That’s what the anti-windfarm lobby does: it targets a town, heavily advertises specific dangers and symptoms, and then the highest anxiety residents “prove” that it was all true. Studies have shown that physical symptoms correlate strongly to the amount of scare campaigns that happen in a wind farm-zoned area.

Whereas, the science says that there is no danger. Study after study commissioned by governments and credible academic institutions agree again and again.

Our own National Health and Medical Research Council (a VERY credible body) say in their report (http://bit.ly/14cRnm6), drawing on peer-reviewed reports from very credible institutions and researchers from Canada, UK, US and others:

· There is no reliable evidence that infrasounds below the hearing threshold produce physiological or psychological effects’ (Berglund & Lindvall 1995).
· Infrasound associated with modern wind turbines is not a source which will result in noise levels which may be injurious to the health of a wind farm neighbour (DTI, 2006). · Findings clearly show that there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicating that wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health (CanWEA, 2009). · Sound from wind turbines does not pose a risk of hearing loss or any other adverse health effects in humans. Subaudible, low frequency sounds and infrasound from wind turbines do not present a risk to human health
(Colby, et al 2009).
· The Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit (Ontario, Canada) reviewed the current literature regarding the known health impacts of wind turbines in order to make an evidence-based decision. Their report concluded that current
evidence failed to demonstrate a health concern associated with wind turbines. `In summary, as long as the Ministry of Environment Guidelines for location criteria of wind farms are followed … there will be negligible adverse health impacts on Chatham-Kent citizens. Although opposition to wind farms on aesthetic grounds is a legitimate point of view, opposition to wind farms on the basis of potential adverse health consequences is not justified by the evidence’ (Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit, 2008).
· Wind energy is associated with fewer health effects than other forms of traditional energy generation and in fact will have positive health benefits (WHO, 2004). · `There are, at present, very few published and scientifically-validated cases of an SACs of wind farm noise emission being problematic … the extent of reliable published material does not, at this stage, warrant inclusion of SACs … into the noise impact assessment planning stage (EPHC, 2009).
· While a great deal of discussion about infrasound in connection with wind turbine generators exists in the media there is no verifiable evidence for infrasound and production by modern turbines (HGC Engineering, 2007).

The question is: in whose interest is it to discredit wind-farming? I’ll give you a clue: they’re funding the anti-wind farm lobby and are making a lot of political donations.

Thank you. I wanted to call-out EvanJames on his pseudoscientific BS, but didn’t have the wherewithal to come-up with anything but “Shut-up, you’re full of it” so I decided to refrain from commenting. I appreciate you providing the evidence I couldn’t.

It is very entertaining following all the scientific arguments presented by so many experts, all garnished with a big dob of ego.

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.

Scaremongering. No such plans exist yet. A monitoring tower has been in place for a while, but not long enough for there to be sufficient data to make a decision.

Others have responded re: cities but the other thing worth mentioning is turbulence. I think wind turbines like clean wind, not the turbulent wind you get in cities (and not just at Parliament House with or without Alan Jones).

IP

Just in case there is any doubt, windfarm syndrome is real, and is distressing and is probably 99% psychological. That doesn’t mean its imaginary – but it’s got very little to do with noise, and a lot to do with uncertainty. It’s very real for the sufferers, but it’s also very easy to treat – build a windfarm and get over it.

Low frequency noise? One of the region’s most strident critics of windfarms, a Yass pharmacist, lives closer to the Hume Highway than he does to any current or propsoed windfarm. Go figure.

How about railway lines? I used to live near (about 10m from!) a railway line in London, one which ran all night. One morning I awoke about 4am. I couldn’t work out why and eventually went back to sleep. Later I woke at the normal time, and turned on the radio to hear there had been a bomb scare and the trains had been stopped. The absence of trains had woken me. Reminds me of the line from the Blues Brothers – “How often do the trains go by?” “So often you won’t even notice.”

IP

chewy14 said :

Proboscus said :

Can someone please explain why electricity is so expensive even though we have our own coal and with solar and wind power getting put into the grid?

Expensive?
Even with the Carbon tax and various add-ons, the average household spends barely 2% of their income on electricity and gas.
We spend far more on alcohol and tobacco individually and almost as much on gambling.

Fair enough that some people do struggle but overall for the majority of people electricity is cheap.

Good point. Perspective is a valuable thing.

So GetUp is holding a counter demonstration. Their version of a closing down sale, eh? I am looking forward to the climate change era ending on September 14th.

thoughtpod said :

Ok, here’s the thing. The science says that the only harm posed by wind-farms is psychsomatic, caused by heavy scare-campaigning causing anxiety-related symptoms. Basically, if someone tells you that something is going to harm you again and again in specific ways, your mind will geenrate the symptoms – sort of a reverse placebo. That’s what the anti-windfarm lobby does: it targets a town, heavily advertises specific dangers and symptoms, and then the highest anxiety residents “prove” that it was all true. Studies have shown that physical symptoms correlate strongly to the amount of scare campaigns that happen in a wind farm-zoned area.

Whereas, the science says that there is no danger. Study after study commissioned by governments and credible academic institutions agree again and again.

Our own National Health and Medical Research Council (a VERY credible body) say in their report (http://bit.ly/14cRnm6), drawing on peer-reviewed reports from very credible institutions and researchers from Canada, UK, US and others:

· There is no reliable evidence that infrasounds below the hearing threshold produce physiological or psychological effects’ (Berglund & Lindvall 1995).
· Infrasound associated with modern wind turbines is not a source which will result in noise levels which may be injurious to the health of a wind farm neighbour (DTI, 2006). · Findings clearly show that there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicating that wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health (CanWEA, 2009). · Sound from wind turbines does not pose a risk of hearing loss or any other adverse health effects in humans. Subaudible, low frequency sounds and infrasound from wind turbines do not present a risk to human health
(Colby, et al 2009).
· The Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit (Ontario, Canada) reviewed the current literature regarding the known health impacts of wind turbines in order to make an evidence-based decision. Their report concluded that current
evidence failed to demonstrate a health concern associated with wind turbines. `In summary, as long as the Ministry of Environment Guidelines for location criteria of wind farms are followed … there will be negligible adverse health impacts on Chatham-Kent citizens. Although opposition to wind farms on aesthetic grounds is a legitimate point of view, opposition to wind farms on the basis of potential adverse health consequences is not justified by the evidence’ (Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit, 2008).
· Wind energy is associated with fewer health effects than other forms of traditional energy generation and in fact will have positive health benefits (WHO, 2004). · `There are, at present, very few published and scientifically-validated cases of an SACs of wind farm noise emission being problematic … the extent of reliable published material does not, at this stage, warrant inclusion of SACs … into the noise impact assessment planning stage (EPHC, 2009).
· While a great deal of discussion about infrasound in connection with wind turbine generators exists in the media there is no verifiable evidence for infrasound and production by modern turbines (HGC Engineering, 2007).

The question is: in whose interest is it to discredit wind-farming? I’ll give you a clue: they’re funding the anti-wind farm lobby and are making a lot of political donations.

Thank you. I wanted to call-out EvanJames on his pseudoscientific BS, but didn’t have the wherewithal to come-up with anything but “Shut-up, you’re full of it” so I decided to refrain from commenting. I appreciate you providing the evidence I couldn’t.

Proboscus said :

Can someone please explain why electricity is so expensive even though we have our own coal and with solar and wind power getting put into the grid?

Expensive?
Even with the Carbon tax and various add-ons, the average household spends barely 2% of their income on electricity and gas.
We spend far more on alcohol and tobacco individually and almost as much on gambling.

Fair enough that some people do struggle but overall for the majority of people electricity is cheap.

Proboscus said :

Can someone please explain why electricity is so expensive even though we have our own coal and with solar and wind power getting put into the grid?

I’ll try.

Energy is provide by a large number of suppliers: ActewAGL, AGL, APG, Country Energy, Energy Australia, Integral Energy, Origin Energy, etc

The energy however is distributed, from the power stations to your home, over shared infrastructure: the transmission lines, sub-stations etc.

This complex system is regulated by the Australian Energy Regulator http://www.aer.gov.au/

The regulator and the energy providers (i.e. the industry) expected electrical energy demand to continue to grow at a stead rate.

To meet this expected growth the regulator encouraged the suppliers, through generous incentives, to invest in the infrastructure – i.e. build more transmission lines, substations, etc. The suppliers did exactly that, investing heavily in infrastructure upgrades.

But ever since 2007 demand for electricity, from the grid, has be falling http://www.aer.gov.au/node/9765

So all this money has been spent on infrastructure that was not needed, but it still needs to be paid for.

Energy generator profits are falling due to the decreased demand.

To get a return on the investments in infrastructure and to maintain their profits the energy companies have increased their prices.

neanderthalsis said :

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.

One of the Coalition’s major policy platforms is to establish an audit commission to identify areas of government waste and cut spending. A similar thing was done in QLD by Campbell Newman, who used it as an excuse to break an election promise not to sack public servants and sack over 14,000 of them.

I am almost certain that Abbott’s audit will be used as an excuse to jettison ‘non-core’ policies that the coalition unwillingly takes into the election, including the emissions reduction target and the direct action policy. The Abbott government will argue that Australia’s finances have been left in such a shambles by the Gillard Government that it unfortunately has no other choice.

Does anyone seriously believe that Abbott or the Libs in general hold the reduction target close to their hearts? The Direct Action policy is a cobbled together piece of junk that was created with the sole purpose of making it appear that the Liberal Party has a policy on climate change. Its words and actions makes it clear that this is simply not the case. They will use the budget as an excuse to bring an end to government action on climate change because, quite simply, they are against taking action on climate change.

I would bet good money that those policies will not make it past the first 18 months of an Abbott government.

Ok, here’s the thing. The science says that the only harm posed by wind-farms is psychsomatic, caused by heavy scare-campaigning causing anxiety-related symptoms. Basically, if someone tells you that something is going to harm you again and again in specific ways, your mind will geenrate the symptoms – sort of a reverse placebo. That’s what the anti-windfarm lobby does: it targets a town, heavily advertises specific dangers and symptoms, and then the highest anxiety residents “prove” that it was all true. Studies have shown that physical symptoms correlate strongly to the amount of scare campaigns that happen in a wind farm-zoned area.

Whereas, the science says that there is no danger. Study after study commissioned by governments and credible academic institutions agree again and again.

Our own National Health and Medical Research Council (a VERY credible body) say in their report (http://bit.ly/14cRnm6), drawing on peer-reviewed reports from very credible institutions and researchers from Canada, UK, US and others:

· There is no reliable evidence that infrasounds below the hearing threshold produce physiological or psychological effects’ (Berglund & Lindvall 1995).
· Infrasound associated with modern wind turbines is not a source which will result in noise levels which may be injurious to the health of a wind farm neighbour (DTI, 2006). · Findings clearly show that there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicating that wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health (CanWEA, 2009). · Sound from wind turbines does not pose a risk of hearing loss or any other adverse health effects in humans. Subaudible, low frequency sounds and infrasound from wind turbines do not present a risk to human health
(Colby, et al 2009).
· The Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit (Ontario, Canada) reviewed the current literature regarding the known health impacts of wind turbines in order to make an evidence-based decision. Their report concluded that current
evidence failed to demonstrate a health concern associated with wind turbines. `In summary, as long as the Ministry of Environment Guidelines for location criteria of wind farms are followed … there will be negligible adverse health impacts on Chatham-Kent citizens. Although opposition to wind farms on aesthetic grounds is a legitimate point of view, opposition to wind farms on the basis of potential adverse health consequences is not justified by the evidence’ (Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit, 2008).
· Wind energy is associated with fewer health effects than other forms of traditional energy generation and in fact will have positive health benefits (WHO, 2004). · `There are, at present, very few published and scientifically-validated cases of an SACs of wind farm noise emission being problematic … the extent of reliable published material does not, at this stage, warrant inclusion of SACs … into the noise impact assessment planning stage (EPHC, 2009).
· While a great deal of discussion about infrasound in connection with wind turbine generators exists in the media there is no verifiable evidence for infrasound and production by modern turbines (HGC Engineering, 2007).

The question is: in whose interest is it to discredit wind-farming? I’ll give you a clue: they’re funding the anti-wind farm lobby and are making a lot of political donations.

Proboscus said :

Can someone please explain why electricity is so expensive even though we have our own coal and with solar and wind power getting put into the grid?

0. International comparisons show Australia to have low costs.
1. Transmission capital and maintenance costs.
2. Paying off past capital costs of generators.
3. Requirement for adequate return on capital for owners.
4. Paying for costs of buying assets from government operators.
5. Investing in peak load for consumer A/C.
6. Wind is more expensive than existing generators.
7. Solar power is even more expensive.
8. Australian staff are very expensive.
9. See point 0.

Can someone please explain why electricity is so expensive even though we have our own coal and with solar and wind power getting put into the grid?

Solidarity said :

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.

Yes there is a choice. 100% renewables is not a wacky delusion by the loopy Greens:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/4/29/renewable-energy/100-renewables-feasible-aemo

Gungahlin Al said :

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.

Yet where the people living near wind farms own shares in the revenue, there are precisely zero such complaints.

dungfungus said :

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.

Please do pass on where these bargain-priced impossible-to-sell hobby farms are? I’m in the market for something out of town away from the light pollution.

Are you prepared to go back to dial-up and leave the NBN at Gungahlin and you will trade light pollution for noise pollution if you live near a wind farm. Maybe a wombat hole is where you need to be.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd5:46 pm 17 Jun 13

Haha it’s incredibly lol the peeps who, with zero science to back it up, say wind turbines are harmful to humans and animals.

Gungahlin Al4:40 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.

Yet where the people living near wind farms own shares in the revenue, there are precisely zero such complaints.

dungfungus said :

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.

Please do pass on where these bargain-priced impossible-to-sell hobby farms are? I’m in the market for something out of town away from the light pollution.

EvanJames said :

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?

1. Wind speeds in all of the capital cities except Hobart are too low.
2. Land is a shed-load cheaper in the country

EvanJames said :

yet we also know that low-frequency noise can cause significant issues, and it’s troubling.

Citation needed. Surf breaking on a beach produces far more infrasound than a wind turbine produces yet Australians are prepared to pay vast sums of money to live as close as possible to it. I went to an interesting talk from an epidemiologist about “turbine sickness”, apparently the best preventative for this disease is to have a wind turbine on your property that is earning you an income.
.

howeph said :

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.

Ha ha!
Thanks for that – it really needed to be spelt out.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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/]

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).

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

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

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.

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!

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?

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.

But Alan Jones IS a wind farm!

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

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

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?

Rawhide Kid Part311:10 pm 16 Jun 13

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.