Well apparently the article is so full of errors that ericc can't even bring himself to mention even one. Aidan manages to list a few and then manages to get them wrong:

1. "it was Engie, not the Victorian government, that closed Hazelwood power station". That's mere playing semantics. The closure was fully supported by the state government and was hastened by government policy. The company made the only decision available to it due to government policy.

2. "Victoria's blackouts didn't extend to SA." Well since the author didn't say they did, I find it hard to call this an error. I wonder what other 'errors' the author 'made' due to Aidan's misreading of the text.

3. "His comparison of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere certainly isn't "by volume" as CO2's atmospheric concentration is at 410ppm, and methane only 1.8ppm." Well the author specifically said his comparisons were of GH gases ie CO2 accounts for 4% of GHG's not of the total atmosphere. Another error due to Aidan's misreading of the text.

So many errors made by the author. What a giggle.

But being a true believer in AGW means you don't have to be correct, just strident.

Just while I'm here and for the fun of it...

"rain bombs, they were a very rare occurrence 50 years ago,"

Asking ant for evidence for his silly assertions is like asking a child to give back the lollipop but let's do it anyway. Any evidence for that ant?

"Denial of the climate has been about for about three decades..."

Yeah those people who deny we have a climate are the worst. Right up there with the sun deniers</sarc>.

A pretty good article. Y2K was a scam that came to an end because it could conclusively be shown to be wrong. But AGW and the ancillary renewable scams are different and will not come to an abrupt end. There's too much money involved. Even getting specific predictions and showing them to be wrong matters not at all. Twelve years ago we were told we had ten years to save the planet. That's obviously been shown to be wrong but they purveyors of the the one true faith merely move on and we are now told that we've got 12 years to save the planet. Hilariously many believe it.

Australia will continue down the path of closing fossil fuel plants and opening renewable plants...and costs to the consumer will continue to sky-rocket while jobs skedaddle. And the politicians and their like will continue to try to hide the cause and kick the solution down the road ie past the next election.

In that regard Snowy 2.0 has been the most successful power policy for decades. It won't do a damn bit of good in regards to supply or prices but it has mollified those who fret about their household costs since they've been convinced that our betters are doing something to resolve the cost problem. By the time it becomes obvious it was a feint, this and probably the next election will be in the rear-view mirror. It was designed to solve a political problem and its done it wonderfully well.

The article suggest we resolve the problem by getting rid of subsidies and letting the market work it out. But that won't happen. In an absolutely free market coal plants would pop-up all over but they'd be beset by lawfare and protest (see Adani) and thus no one will take the risk. At some point, when things become so dire that lies no longer work, the government will need to step in and build them themselves.

But don't expect to see that for at least a decade....or 12 years (grin).

Come on Ant.

In the 1960s people sailed up Townsville main street, Flinders St, to get away from the catastrophe the flood was causing in Auckland Creek.

In 1980, in a minor little cyclone, which did little damage, we got 26 inches of rain in 6 hours. Fortunately this was mostly on the islands, so no major flooding in cities.

All these clowns who have fallen for the global warming scam, are in keeping with that old saying, "none so dumb as those who don't want to see".

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=20014
net zero immigration, no tax or welfare benefits after second child

https://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy
The cornerstone of the "no such thing as man made global warming" argument is that scientists are rapacious bastards and coal, oil and gas corporations are run by innocent shopkeepers simply trying to scrape together a crust of bread for their needy families.

next the warmist will be arrogant enough to think they can control the suns temperature.

Thank you mhaze for saving me the trouble of dealing with Aidan's misinformation.
On the subject of coal, the Andrew's government has been hostile for years to Latrobe Valley power generators using brown coal, despite their production of the cheapest electricity, and contributions to regional employment. This hostility culminated in the tripling of Victoria's royalty on brown coal in 2016.
The whole coal-fired industry (black and brown) is destined to close under current policies. This is being caused by subsidies for renewable energy, preference given to renewable energy in national market regulations, and factors relating to the age of plants. In addition, governments won't allow new coal fired stations to be built.