Aidan, that would be a good place to start.
Any previous attempts at trying to get the system back to where it should be, has failed, because the system does not want change.
The pollies are doing quite nicely the way they have set it up and I believe a concentrated and violent physical attack will do the job, as vocal attacks don't hurt scumbags, as they have the thickest skin and the lowest ethics known to mankind.
I have always found that people who suffer a physical lesson and end up with a physical reminder of their folly, are reminded of their wrong doing on a daily basis and actually learn from it.
Talking is the gutless and useless way to achieve nothing when faced with someone who will not listen to reason even though he knows he is wrong.
I doubt it would be civil war.
If there is a section of the population who agree with the govt, let them side with the govt.
As far fetched as it may seem there are always those who have to oppose, because they can.
No I don't think it will be a civil war.
Those against will simply stand back and let those for get on with it, as they know that ultimately it will be good for them too.

Dear ALTRAV,

Alright mate, I have raised your mental state several times on this forum and I'm doing so again now. Are you really that far off kilter that you are now advocating shooting people? You have a political beef and you want to resolve it with violence and death? You would be very much at home in Syria with a beard, a flag, and a mantra. What makes you any different to any ISIS member?

Or indeed a mafia member. Are you trying to import the old Italian ways of getting rid of politicians you disagree with? Trimbole certainly did when he disposed of Donald Mackay.

We really can do without that kind of thinking here. We Australians are pretty proud of the fact that we allow our democracy to help solve issues without resorting to violence. If you want to advocate for the type of violence that has pervaded the homeland of your parents then migrate now. We all know what you think of Australians anyway.

SR, so you've just made my point for me, AGAIN.
Seeing as how you drag me off topic again, I am obliged to respond in kind.
Now if your saying that the Aussie way of doing things is so good, then why are we still being abused and assaulted.
Your way is the way of fools.
If you are typical of Aussies, you can suffer like the rest.
I see a problem and if it needs fixing, I set about to fix it.
You and your lot sit back and say, 'Ah that's the way it is, it's someone else's problem, that's what we pay them for'.
So while you've been banging on about not fixing the problem we continue to have money and rights stolen from us without any checks and balances.
Your type of thinking is the kind that keeps these scumbags alive and well.
Where-as my kind of actions are for the good and right the wrongs you and your lot believe in so much.
You are part of the problem but typically will never see it.
As for the mafia and such.
They have been here for decades.
Their Aussie names are Unions and Labour.
So SR, to recap.
Your method is a failure.
My method is a conclusive one which will succeed.
It all comes down to what kind of a lifestyle you want to have.
One where you are being lied to and fleeced more and more by the day or one where you can enjoy the fruits of your labour and not have to pay 'protection' money to the scumbags.
Money that is rightfully yours and you would be spending on yourself if the scum wasn't stealing it from us.

Aidan,

I'm not the least interested in the ability of expensive batteries to take advantage of high spot prices caused by the RET, enabling their paydown. It doesn't advance AGW mitigation one jot.

I am interested in whether expensive batteries, at the usage they would be needed to provide anything approaching 100% renewables reliably enough to power civilization, are viable. No truly plausible case has been put up for this, just the dreams and aspirations of fantasists.

Synthetic fuel production is a must for society, if we are to fully tackle AGW, not an afterthought to find some use for excess energy. It will need reliable electricity to meet a constant need for fuel on demand. Then there is the electrification of urban transport, desalination, fertilizer production, industrial heat etc., requiring constancy of power to meet demand.

No amount of hoping storage prices to fall can replace the certainty that nuclear dispatchability has provided more cheaply than the examples renewablitsas chose to cherry-pick, and will imminently provide .

Bazz, thinking about the simulation you suggest, the degree of intermittency determines the storage required to run 100% renewables. Let's say, in an extremely hypothetical scenario, that an entire year's consumption (excluding significant losses and inefficiencies) is generated in the first six months, and nothing over the next six. This would leave the requirement to store six months of energy.

I don't know what the intermittency level is anywhere and, of course, I don't suggest it is anywhere so high as to require storage for six consecutive months of consumption. However, I do suggest that the level would be very large, and nobody can know how large it will be enough to be confident a high level of civilization can viably exist on 100% renewables.

The more geographically diverse the generation the lower the intermittency, but the more dispersed becomes the generation, storage and transmission infrastructure from consumption centres. Your proposed simulations must accommodate all such factors and a multitude of losses and inefficiencies. Who would you trust to do them, AEMO?

Luciferase, Probably it could be run by CSIRO as I think they have
experience of computer modelling. Actually it would not be modelling
but simulation. The real time grid demand is fed into the computer.
I would visualize that a virtual wind farm could be setup using a real
wind farm as a protype.
Then all real existing wind and solar farms would have their real time
data fed into the computer.
Then using real time wind speeds in a site to be tested the virtual
o/p from the virtual wind farm is generated into the grid simulation
as theoretical supply.
To obtain the real time wind speeds for the testing site cheap wx
stations can be set up.
By having real time wind data for the virtual windfarm it would give
quite accurate input to the simulated grid.

The same as above would be done for solar farms.
After two or three years and adding required virtual wind farms to new
sites should give quite accurate performance of a real grid.

The cost of this would be minimal compared with making a mistake in
judging what is required.

Lucifease,
Forgot to mention storage, whether batteries or hydro etc.
They could be added and the effect of adding them at various points
in the grid could be trialed.