Roses1, why did you cowrite a paper showing a cost increase instead of assuming a lower cost of capital and showing a cost decrease?

CHICKENS, CHICKENS, CHICKENS!

Shame on the so-called "Liberal" party for mumbling insincere apologies about this "climate change" thing. Why can't any of them have the guts, dare to say the truth and call this "global warming" propaganda what it really is - the biggest fraud ever!

Yes, renewable energy is still a good thing because it is not right to rob the earth in a brief couple of centuries of its energy resources that accumulated there for billions of years and may still be needed by future species long after humans are gone. Yet this has nothing to do with the so-called "pollution" lie: CO2 is a good product for plants to grow and produce our food and shelter.

Yes yuyustu, Plants do extremely well if exposed to increased Co2, and it's referred to as the greenhouse effect! Moreover, an acre of trees evaporates 2.5 times more moisture than an acre of open water.

And as is much more noticeable in the cooler months, atmosphere with more moisture as evidenced in an overcast night, is warmer than a cloudless starlit night where even in tropical northern Queensland, one may need to light the fire and unpack the donas.

Which demonstrate that atmospheric moisture traps heat and more of it thanks to bulked up plants using Co2 as bodybuilders use steroids.

More evaporated plant provided moisture traps more of it!

And given the roll out of cheaper than coal carbon free or carbon neutral alternative energy along with the huge economic upsides that could produce if retained by we the people!

One wonders what the real problem is with just simply unwinding our dependence on coal, which by the way, can still be used in a carbon neutral economy as the source of coal seam gas used in ceramic fuel cells to produce the lowest costing energy anywhere in the world.

Which as you likely know produce mostly pristine water vapor as the exhaust product. And all we might do just by using the brains we were born with, comes with a massive economic upside!

So what problem do you have with that or applying the precautionary principle on just the basis of observable known changes and effects, all of which have a cause!
Alan B.

Graham this activist tripe has no place on any serious forum.

I am surprised this junk was published here.

If solar and wind were any sort of solution subsidies would not be needed. The fact that they are just proves what nonsense we have fallen for.
Great big solar array in Mildura has been mothballed and they blame reduced subsidies? Rubbish, all the usual suspects ripping our tax dollars with flim flam and scam!

PricewaterhouseCoopers in November 2012; hardly a radical Agency, stated that to make a real effort to ward off dangerous temperature increases emissions must be reduced by 5% every year. The LNP goal is far off this goal, Labor needs a much more stringent policy.

Quote from Forward of Report:

"It’s time to plan for a warmer world.
The annual Low Carbon Economy Index centres on one core statistic: the rate of change of global carbon intensity.
This year we estimated that the required improvement in global carbon intensity to meet a 2°C warming target has risen to 5.1% a year, from now to 2050.

From:

http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/sustainability/publications/low-carbon-economy-index/assets/pwc-low-carbon-economy-index-2012.pdf

Data in relation to the degree of radiative forcing by greenhouse gases from a reliable source, if you disagree watch the Professor Kroth film clip:

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html

The column at the end of the reference shows that 2.974 watts were created per square metre in 2015 taking into account all greenhouse gases.

Psychologist, ProfessorJerry Kroth, states he believes that deniers of climate change including luke warmers are delusional.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnEO2ysnO6Q

Another psychology study shows how when data from climate science is put into a different context statistians and economists agree with the data put to them. Disproving the opinions deniers suggest.

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewandowskyGEC16.html

Many countries are in strife around the Planet in relation to water and food resources.

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/may/30/el-nino-is-over-but-it-leaves-nearly-100-million-people-short-of-food?CMP=share_btn_tw