We're well past the end of the beginning. Though most people on this board cling on to the delusion that renewables are expensive and can't do the job, the public has started to see through the lie. Once electricity prices fall, the views of the previous government will generally be regarded as lunatic fringe.

Whether that will be regarded as the end is uncertain, as the 43% target is pathetic and even net zero isn't enough. But at least we won't be controlled by those who deem it impossible because they're too stupid to see how to do it without cutting living standards.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Fester and Alan B.,
Some people, most notably Bjørn Lomborg, noticed that renewable energy was expensive but the cost was dropping fast, and predicted that when it got to the point where it was cheaper than fossil fuels, there would be a rapid switchover. Now we have reached that point. We can rapidly decarbonise our electricity sector, but there are unforeseen problems - chief among them being that doing nothing (and driving up electricity prices) is the most lucrative option for electricity companies.

Australia has very abundant solar and wind resources. Not everywhere is so lucky, so in parts of the world it makes sense to supplement renewables with nuclear power. They're finding it's an expensive option. Britain, with its new Hinkley Point nuclear power station already running way over budget, recently decided to go with more nuclear power anyway for energy security reasons, but those modular reactors Rolls Royce intends to build don't exist yet and nobody knows when they will.

Thorium power and MSRs genuinely have a lot of potential, but commercialising them is not a trivial task. It makes sense to do the R&D where the product is needed, rather than in Australia where it isn't.

Alan B., are you aware that artificial nuclear reactions had not been achieved a century ago?

Aidan,

The erratic nature of renewable energy means that it cannot replace the baseload power supply without sufficient storage. Including this storage, requirement makes renewable energy far from the cheapest.

Nuclear is still the cheapest reliable non-GHG generating power supply.

"Though most people on this board cling on to the delusion that renewables are expensive and can't do the job, the public has started to see through the lie."

That's rich Aidan. The lie that people are starting to see is that of erratic energy being up to scratch. And if that isn't enough you bring poor old Bjorn in to support your opinion. So what does Bjorn think of erratic energy? Not much from what I can see.

https://nypost.com/2022/06/19/fossil-fuel-price-spikes-are-causing-pain-but-little-climate-payoff/?mc_cid=1e04bb28ce&mc_eid=ec8e12f466

Albozo has made a rod for the coalition to beat Labor with.

The chances that Labor can reach its wildly ambitious targets are slim,
The odds are that energy prices are going to rapidly increase,
There is a good chance that their policies will lead to blackouts.

the delusion that renewables are expensive and can't do the job
Aidan,
no delusion, just fact as things stand presently !

Ah well now some of the previously unknowns of the 43% legislation
are now coming to light.
It appears that heavy industry will be allowed to buy "high quality"
co2 offset certificates.
It was not defined what "High Quality" means.
It does imply that you and I will only be permitted to buy
"Low Quality" offset certificates.
Perhaps the big CO2 emitters will buy their certificates from the
Gnomes of Zurich but we will be forced to buy from The Elves of Berne.

You think I am joking don't you; so ask someone in finance who the
Gnomes of Zurich really are.