Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

"SR, The problem is that the greenies want to have their cake and eat it. The reality is that renewable energy comes with a price not only a huge electricity price, but an environmental one too."

Sure mate, drove through the Latrobe Valley few months ago (you know, the one with three large coal fired power stations. This is the kind of warning they get regularly;

"Air quality in the Latrobe Valley is classified as UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS at Churchill and Newborough. Air quality at Moe is UNHEALTHY FOR ALL – in those conditions everyone should reduce prolonged or heavy physical activity.

Stronger winds and forecast rain are expected to bring improved conditions during the day.

EPA’s forecast is for POOR to VERY POOR air quality in the Latrobe Valley for the next 2 to 3 hours. Air quality is expected to improve to GOOD this afternoon..

Everyone should take necessary precautions to protect their health. People are reminded to open their windows and ventilate their homes and businesses during periods of reduced smoke activity."

Can your neighbourhood host the next coal fired powerstation your lot want to subsidise into existence?

Shadow,
It's disappointing your opinion failed to change when the facts did. Renewables used to be an expensive option, but now they're cheaper than new coal. And our high electricity prices stem not from renewables but from market manipulation and high gas prices. More use of renewables brings electricity prices down - see http://theconversation.com/wind-and-solar-cut-rather-than-boost-australias-wholesale-electricity-prices-119979

So take another look at your position:
1) is true.
2) is true to some extent, but the denials position now gets vastly more airtime than it deserves.
3) is arguably true, but other countries (including China) have used our inaction as an excuse to do nothing.
4) is irrelevant, as renewables reduce power prices (see the above link)
5) Reliability and dispatchability are very different things. Australia's coal fired power stations are unreliable - they keep breaking down. Renewables are more reliable. And even when you do nothing to boost network stability, you can get a lot more than 40% of your power from renewables before it becomes a problem. When the proportion is enough to cause problems, they're merely technical issues to overcome rather than insurmountable obstacles.

"Considering the rocketing energy prices in Australia, the blackouts in South Australia, the recent close calls in Victoria, and the collapsing industrial base in the country, I have no reason to doubt my original assessments."

Then you're not considering them in enough detail:
The rocketting energy prices in Australia are due to market manipulation and high gas prices.
Blackouts in SA are far less frequent then they used to be, and are comparable to the other states - see http://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/914-Keep-calm-and-carry-on.pdf
Transmission and distribution faults cause far more blackouts than supply problems do.
The recent close calls in Victoria were caused by failure of a coal fired power station (plus one being offline for scheduled maintenance) at a time of very high demand.
The collapsing industrial base of the country was mostly the result of an overvalued Aussie dollar. High power prices did lay a part too, but renewables weren't to blame for that.

The Greenys? Shadow Minister is not alone in using that term like a swear word
He, his side of politics, see every concern for the environment as GREENY JUNK
Yet more and more true conservationists, even from his camp, are saying enough
Still those who get their views from Sky/Fox/The paper the fish and chips came in,buy that greeny stuff
Yes, no fan, not any more, of the green party but they sometimes get it right
After all even this Government gets it right, not often but some times

SR,

I have spent some time at the Latrobe valley, and while the fine particle emissions are a threat to a small number of those sensitive to them, the visual impact of these power stations which generate roughly 30x the power of the proposed super wind farm at Robbins island, and supply base load is probably less.

Add that these power stations are several decades old and new coal power stations would emit far less CO2 and a tiny fraction of the particle emissions, and you get a better comparison.

However, as the point I was making that renewable energy also has a high environmental cost, your response confirms it.

Aidan,

With regards your response:

3 China from the start made it known that it would continue increasing emissions, and made no commitments, so claiming that they nearly doubled their emissions because Aus didn't reduce fast enough is laughable.
4 This is deceitful. While the wholesale price which does not include the subsidies is slightly lower, the retail price which claws back the subsidies is significantly higher. The correlation between a country's electricity prices and renewable energy is nearly 100%.
5 Aidan, you are talking to a power systems engineer. The power stations have multiple generators. That there is a crisis when one generator breaks down is due to the lack of reserve capacity in the system when renewable power crashes.

I was in a heavy industrial plant that saw large scale electricity prices shoot up from 4c/kWhr to 10c/kWhr in a decade, and the plant close down. The high Aus dollar also contributed, but for many the electricity price was the last straw.

Mr. Hypocrite Brown is now calling for 'moderation' on unreliable energy projects. Typical of the Left's attitude when ugliness touches on their lives. It's really meant for the plebs.

SM, rather than take SR's word for something which apparently you know more about, I'd like to hear your take on this latest revelation from BAZZ about the new GW discovery.
SR typically comes out immediately attacking the veracity of these new findings.
The fact that they have been discovered at all is enough for a thinking man to stop and seek more information rather than reject it outright from the comfort of ones chair.
As I've always said, we don't know the truth about this GW debacle, so who do we believe?
My position of skepticism has never changed, but I admit I am no expert, so therefore not qualified to comment.
What I am allowed to do is ask questions, and having continually done so I have always found the GW thing a very hard sell.
Renewables, even harder.
The problem with renewables is that they are a fledgling and yet truly untested (commercially), product or concept.
Historically renewables do not have a very good duty cycle, and it is this that has kept it in the 'development' category still.
The price of power, like all our other commodity prices, we are told, are high because that is what it costs, RUBBISH, all the prices are high because these essential services have been sold off to the govts various mates and are now privatised.
This fact alone should have sent warning bells to the public when they first started selling them off.
Renewables are even more precarious, and will NEVER see price drops.
It's called, PROFITS