ttbn, you may be right with your "There is no such thing as an “all-electric fossil-fuel-free modern industrialised economy, no matter how much the arguments rage". The question is, should one simply declare it's wrong or try to prove it's wrong or demonstrate it's probably or really impossible? Fighting on all three fronts seems worthwhile. And all those possibilities require intellectual effort I'm afraid.

CM,

I think that was Vladimir Putin's job when he was in East Germany. There is also the claim that Germany was funding anti-nuclear activity in France.

https://www.ege.fr/sites/ege.fr/files/media_files/German_Interference_Political_Foundations.pdf

The idea might have merit, but I think that the "follow the money" explanation of One Nation a bit better, especially with all the associated environmental destruction of wind and solar.

David,

I miss Alan B's frequent mention of molten salt reactors as the answer to a myriad of problems. It's nice to see people with a bit of passion.

Regarding the clean energy experiment, I believe that the current problem relates to the fact that renewable energy tends to get generated at the same time, which tends to send the electricity diving: The idea is that all the storage is supposed to jump in and buy the cheap power, but much of the infrastructure to allow this doesn't exist, so the excess power gets curtailed. Even were the infrastructure there, wastage of 25-40% is likely, and probably more as the figure is estimated from a model.

The Australian Nuclear Association has links to mini lectures explaining the inherent problems of wind and solar.

If the 6 legged chickens that used to hang off the back fence gate at CSIRO’s Poultry Genetics on Delhi Rd behind Channel 10 Studios, Sydney are any indication - then we’re in for fun times when they start fiddling with electron flow distribution, by any method. Maybe they can devise a way to turn the ALP, LNP & Green’s politicians and senators into useable resources other than manure?