the 'scientist ' who tried to scare the heck out of kids in the 1970's warning of the upcoming ice age have not changed the methods of propaganda. Thankfully the more people look at facts the less concerned they are about gw religion. btw anyone been to the Barrier Reef lately. It was meant to be destroyed 40 years ago. And how is the dams in Sydney? You guys out of water yet?

Let's see if I've got this straight.

During the high fashionability of fascist national socialism in the first half of the 20th century, governments throughout the western work centralised energy production in huge state bureaucracies and instrumentalities, on the assumption that government knows best, and built societal reliance on coal-fired power stations.

Now these same governments are telling us this was the worst mistake in the history of the world and threatens the very habitability of the planet.

And now you're telling us the solution is for government to dictate control of the supply of energy, and pick favourites in detail?

Excuse me? Are you guys listening to what you're saying?

I don't give a damn what Abbott does with the rules, goal posts or anything else, provided he gets us off the hook of those crazy Renewable Energy Targets.

We can see everywhere in Europe trying like hell to get out of them, except the UK of course, who really must have a suicide wish. The past leader in foolishness Germany, can't get out of the business quickly enough.

We have Obama organizing pay back to his campaign funders with it, & us poor fools with targets only because Gillard used them to buy support from people like this author & the Australian Conservation Foundation he is campaigning for here.

Hell no one actually believes this stuff any more, but it's been such a great gravy train, they find it hard to let go. Can't you people find something useful to campaign on Guy, surely we haven't fixed everything all ready.

I agree with article for the following reasons:
- the government's RET review was fundamentally flawed as it was headed by a climate change sceptic. Despite findings that the RET will reduce electricity prices in the longer term, the recommendations were still to slash the RET
- any slashing of the RET will be economically damaging - investment will be lost, jobs will be lost
- renewable energy is not just about solar and wind energy - a recent ABC Landline episode covered the concerns of sugar producers in Australia with any reduction in the RET - they are producing biogas from cane waste, reducing pollution, and running the the refineries with it and feeding remaining power into the Queensland electricity grid. These producers have invested $ into the biogas plants which they won't recoup any time soon if the RET is reduced
- completely apart from global warming, it makes environmental sense to move to renewables due to the population health benefits of reduced pollution. Coal power is filthy- just ask the Chinese., and finally
- anyone who thinks that the existing mostly coal fired electricity grid was built without government funding doesn't know their history. A lot of it might be privatised now, but the majority of it was originally built by governments - local and state. it makes sense for governments to assist in the conversion from a polluting fossil fuel electricity system to a clean renewable one.

David G:
Thanks for all the compliments.
So I thrill you with my wisdom and intellect do I? I'm almost blushing!
And as to the Buddhas, I can find no reference in any of their teaching, to wind or solar, let alone any other alternative energy option, the thread here, or at least it was, until you as usual, used it as an off topic, personal attack platform.
For a minute there I thought you were seriously quoting from the Isil handbook!
I mean, you seem to be one of their most stalwart defenders/apologists/recruiters?
It's is a fundamental truth, that it is impossible to have a foot in each one of those very different philosophies; however personally thrilling, without doing extremely serious, permanent anatomical or quite grievous psychological damage/harm!
Me, I've seen what passive resistance resulted in, and the execution of over six million non combatant Jews; although, the modern example seems to be no better than those who butchered them in such numbers?
As unpalatable it is, I can see no other way to prevent another vastly worse genocide, than taking up the battle in defense of liberty and freedom!
Passive resistance being a recipe or open armed invitation for an even worse genocide!
Frankly, there is just no such thing as a good terrorist!
Even Buddha and Buddhist know that there is a season for everything, including armed resistance; and or, taking the fight to up to an implacable enemy, who only ever represents pure unadulterated evil!
Perhaps we could take a leaf from King David's book, who had his warriors polish their shields, and then all concentrate that reflected light and heat, on the King of his Persian enemy.
Essentially blinding then cooking him?
And the first recorded example of useful solar thermal power?
Wouldn't it be good if we could find a modern, more benign version of that, as a multifaceted laser beam, that merely disabled everyone in its beam (scrambled your automatic motor neuron responses/turned them into completely uncoordinated jelly) for a day or two, rather than killing armed opponents?
Rhrosty.

@ Johnj one consultant to the RET review thought power prices could decline while other consultants disagreed. As they say extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence..that paying more works out cheaper. Whether burning biomass is sustainable is a hot topic. I think the bagasse mills could survive without the LGC subsidy. Away from cane harvest time they use a lot of timber waste trucked there with the help of diesel fuel, a fact that is overlooked.

Sure coal is polluting but it currently provides 64% of our electricity. In 2013 wind and solar contributed 4.4% out of the 13.1% renewables. Since hydro is near maxed and biomass is controversial expanding wind and solar will be a very slow and costly way to displace coal. That would also seem to need energy storage which remains generally expensive. As the gas price rises wind becomes more competitive without the RET and rooftop solar has the advantage it eliminates the middle man.

As for perceived bias in the review panel and past help to the coal industry I think we have judge the current facts for ourselves. In my view the RET is a rather weak gesture that won't get us anywhere near the goal of overwhelming decarbonisation. We should strongly target emissions first so perhaps those people could find work in whatever industry reduced emissions the most.