The Forum > Article Comments > Solar subsidy not so sunny > Comments
Solar subsidy not so sunny : Comments
By David Leyonhjelm, published 21/2/2018Even if there was once some justification for subsidising the cost of solar panels, that is certainly no longer the case.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
-
- All
Posted by Taswegian, Wednesday, 21 February 2018 8:29:13 AM
| |
The main effect of this is moral rather than financial - to turn millions of Australians into thieves. It is in the interest of the regime to corrupt everyone because then they can get away with anything without being blamed.
If I could I would install solar panels on my roof and disconnect from the grid, but my house is too old for that. Obviously I would never ask for a subsidy - I prefer to continue being stolen from. Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 21 February 2018 8:57:16 AM
| |
Yes Yuyutsu
Call the Electricity Nazis in their black helicopters to find the "Thieves" hiding under panels. then camps? Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 21 February 2018 12:04:01 PM
| |
What generous subsidy would that be David? The one that sees the power Authority pay me 8 cents per KwH? As they hook into me at 24 cents per KwH! For that which they sell back to me, but only after they've made a bigger profit from me than their other sources of revenue?
All around the country signed and sealed solar panel contracts are proving not to be worth the paper they are written on? Clearly, power authorities are a law unto themselves, able to bill you because their wires pass in front of your property? Or charge a premium to guarantee supply? And if that doesn't sound like a government protected protection racket? I'd like to know what is! It's well past time government stopped some industries from vying for your custom? And here I'm referring to the tacit if unspoken prohibition on nuclear power? Not just any nuclear power but rather. Walk away safe, molten salt, (2 cents per KwH Quote, unquote) thorium power! Or could it be that David and many other influential politicians with the power and or influence needed, are themselves "arms length" investors in 18th century, dirty, polluting, contaminating, coal fired energy and raised the solar subsidy, because it's eating into his unearned, "arms length" dividend stream? Surely not? That would see this subject raised due to some unrevealed or "arms length" commercial interest? And if widespread enough in political circles? Would possibly explain the insane if unstated prohibition on purely peaceful purpose, nuclear power? It can't be, our current, limited energy policy or energy crisis, can be sheeted home, almost exclusively, to fear of green reprisals at the ballot box surely? Or can it? What's your view on nuclear power David? Not just any nuclear power, but proven, walk away safe, molten salt, thorium power? Or is it, you just can't be bothered, or personally compromised by your coal fired, "arms length" investments? Well that would explain your silence on, for peaceful purpose only, nuclear power? Or your untrammelled verbosity on solar panel subsidies? Still waiting David! Alan B. Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 21 February 2018 12:09:15 PM
| |
Meanwhile of course the good senator does not mention the government subsidies provided to the coal and fossil fuels industry - as described here: http://www.marketforces.org.au/campaigns/ffs/#
What would happen to the coal and fossil fuel industries in a truly non-subsidized level playing field market? Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 21 February 2018 2:22:22 PM
| |
Dear Daffy,
«Meanwhile of course the good senator does not mention the government subsidies provided to the coal and fossil fuels industry» Yes, but why just them? Anyone who accepts Medicare payments or government pensions, works for pay or contracts in government service, sells them anything or indeed, receives a salary and perks for being elected, including the author - THIEVES ALL! Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 21 February 2018 2:40:32 PM
|
Then there is the 'duck curve' problem whereby gas generators have to ramp up quickly in the late afternoon as residential solar wanes. In California that is about 13 GW in summer but they have cheap gas unlike eastern Australia. It seems home solar owners like to keep the aircon running even if it means reliance on the grid
http://www.wattclarity.com.au/2018/02/queensland-region-sees-a-new-record-peak-scheduled-demand-at-1850-on-monday-12th-february/
In future they won't be getting the generous daytime feed-in tariff to pay for nighttime power use.