Australia's ruling coalition loses 50th straight Newspoll

[webfact]

Australia's ruling coalition loses 50th straight Newspoll

 

Australia's Prime Minister Scott Morrison speaks during the INPEX Gala Dinner in Darwin, Australia November 16, 2018. David Moir/Pool via REUTERS/Files

 

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia's conservative government is heading for defeat in a looming election, a widely watched opinion poll showed on Monday, after disappointing news on the economy tarnished the credibility of Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

 

Notching its 50th poll loss in a row, the Liberal-National coalition trailed the centre-left Labor Party by 54 percent to 46 percent on a two-party preferred basis.

 

The coalition trailed Labor by 53 percent to 47 percent in the previous Newspoll for The Australian newspaper. The results would give Labor a clear victory if the election were fought today. Time is short as the vote is expected some time in May.

 

The coalition's primary vote was on 36 percent, behind Labor on 39 percent. The poll of 1,610 people was conducted from March 7 to 10 and had a margin of error of 2.4 percentage points.

 

The result comes a week after government figures showed the Australian economy almost ground to a halt in the fourth quarter of last year, undermining the coalition's claim to being the party of better economic management.

 

The coalition has also been hit by a wave of high-profile retirements, with two senior ministers saying earlier this month they would not contest the election.

 

Morrison needs to retain all the parliamentary seats held by his coalition government, but his chances are weakened by a wave of incumbent lawmakers in marginal seats set to retire.

 

The government has its annual budget on April 2 and is expected to announce a return to surplus and likely some sort of tax cuts or spending promises to sweeten voters.

 

Monday's poll did show Morrison remained the preferred prime minister over Labor's Bill Shorten, with a share of 43 percent to 36 percent. Some 43 percent of voters approved of Morrison's performance, while 45 percent disapproved.

 

The findings come despite Morrison's attempt to cast the election as a referendum on border security and asylum seekers - hot-button topics in previous votes.

 

(Reporting by Wayne Cole; Editing by Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-0

[keith101]

So the previous Finance Minister now Prime Minister has screwed the country who knew my hands up anyone else , the Liberal Party always screws the Aussie economy and the Labor Party always fixes it and only a Lib will deny it despite what the history books show .

[Lacessit]

The Victorian state election showed what the electorate thinks of fear and division tactics. 

Morrison is a moron. While not on a par with Abbott and that knighthood, his coal stunt in Parliament was a convincing demonstration of ineptitude.

Australian voters have repeatedly shown they will not elect a party riven with division and scandal. The Liberal/National parties are about to re-learn that lesson in a big way.

[Lucius verus]

1 hour ago, keith101 said:

So the previous Finance Minister now Prime Minister has screwed the country who knew my hands up anyone else , the Liberal Party always screws the Aussie economy and the Labor Party always fixes it and only a Lib will deny it despite what the history books show .

Whatever you're smoking I'll buy a kilo of it.   

ALP will borrow against our AAA rating, boost minimum wages which are already the highest in the world or close to it, open the floodgates for human traffickers ,make a lot of litigation lawyers rich and employ thousands of more incompetent women in the public service and uniform jobs. They will sue the crap out of the Aussie taxpayer for sex harrassment and stress related problems.

Australia is heading for bad times.

[wombat]

don't forget these are the same people who ran polls saying Hilary would win

[samran]

2 hours ago, Lucius verus said:

Whatever you're smoking I'll buy a kilo of it.   

ALP will borrow against our AAA rating, boost minimum wages which are already the highest in the world or close to it, open the floodgates for human traffickers ,make a lot of litigation lawyers rich and employ thousands of more incompetent women in the public service and uniform jobs. They will sue the crap out of the Aussie taxpayer for sex harrassment and stress related problems.

Australia is heading for bad times.

Shall we find you a safe space then?

[DoctorG]

LNP have an identity problem. Their actions depicts them as a centre-left party whilst still trying to make us believe they are conservative.

[dundas]

2 hours ago, Lucius verus said:

Whatever you're smoking I'll buy a kilo of it.   

ALP will borrow against our AAA rating, boost minimum wages which are already the highest in the world or close to it, open the floodgates for human traffickers ,make a lot of litigation lawyers rich and employ thousands of more incompetent women in the public service and uniform jobs. They will sue the crap out of the Aussie taxpayer for sex harrassment and stress related problems.

Australia is heading for bad times.

If Labor gets in, my guess is they'll be like the state Labor government in Victoria – just getting the job done without any nutters and ideologues dictating policy. I hope that federally their first priority will be to snaffle some of the corporate tax evaders who earn billions out of Australia and pay zero tax. As for the highest wages in the world, well maybe, but there's also a very high cost of living which is why so many middle income earners are turned off the current mob – they've seen corporate profits and CEO salaries boom, but they've been left floundering. 

[Lacessit]

4 hours ago, Lucius verus said:

Whatever you're smoking I'll buy a kilo of it.   

ALP will borrow against our AAA rating, boost minimum wages which are already the highest in the world or close to it, open the floodgates for human traffickers ,make a lot of litigation lawyers rich and employ thousands of more incompetent women in the public service and uniform jobs. They will sue the crap out of the Aussie taxpayer for sex harrassment and stress related problems.

Australia is heading for bad times.

 

The ALP has come up with quite sensible policies to curtail tax rorts such as negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts, which benefit rich retirees most. Liberal policy is do nothing. The ALP is not straying from a hard line on border protection. Newstart is a national disgrace in terms of where it puts young people w.r.to the poverty line.

 

Before you start smoking, I suggest you stop injecting.

[Lacessit]

50 minutes ago, car720 said:

Here is the problem.

Voting is compulsory in Australia.

However, how can any man who calls himself honourable be forced to chose between two proven liars?

We have lived off the sheep's back for too long now.  It will all dry up one day and then Australia will go down the hole faster than a greasy turd.

What problem? If you don't want to vote for anyone, you can spoil your ballot, or simply not fill it out.

Australia hasn't lived off the sheep's back for many years now. It has enormous potential in terms of energy generation and clean food products, provided we can get rid of the current crop of politicians that have been holding us back.

 

[Lucius verus]

1 hour ago, car720 said:

Here is the problem.

Voting is compulsory in Australia.

However, how can any man who calls himself honourable be forced to chose between two proven liars?

We have lived off the sheep's back for too long now.  It will all dry up one day and then Australia will go down the hole faster than a greasy turd.

Voting in Australia is NOT compulsory.

Turning up on election day and having your name crossed off the electoral  roll is!

You can make a dart out of it and toss it out the window if you want.

You don't have to vote, state or federal.

 

[Prissana Pescud]

2 hours ago, car720 said:

Here is the problem.

Voting is compulsory in Australia.

However, how can any man who calls himself honourable be forced to chose between two proven liars?

We have lived off the sheep's back for too long now.  It will all dry up one day and then Australia will go down the hole faster than a greasy turd.

I agree with compulsory voting, so I do not agree it is the problem.

(you can always place your vote papers in the box without placing a mark on them)

 I have always tried to be centrist in my opinions. And with Abbot still pulling the strings,

Liberals are still a right wing party. Turnbull was a popular PM, but Abbott stooges knifed him.

And the constant parade of corrupt Lib pollies who got caught out but were never forced to admit or show remorse is almost a daily event.

Lastly, we have not lived off the the sheeps back since the early 60's. It is resources such as iron and coal.

Coal is passe for so many reasons. Iron has never been value added, it has just made a lot of very big holes in the Pilbara region of W.A.

 Either way, it is time to get rid of this tired, corrupt, elite and out of date party.

Making the rich richer and hoping for the trickle down effect was disproved decades ago. But the Libs persist with their cronies

in the banking and financial systems. Holding out against a royal commission which exposed total corruption with the Lib elite mates was the final straw.

And look at all the rats who are calling quits, and abandoning the party. Let the Libs sink down into the swamp they built. 

[Saladin]

Voters should remember that Tony Abbot's wrecking crew got in with no policies whatsoever other than dismantling whatever Labor had done, and despite the Australian economy being in good shape at the time. This time let us hope that the voting public is bright enough to ignore rhetoric and party loyalties, and focus on policies and demonstrated performance.

[VincentRJ]

The issue for me is the price of energy, or electricity specifically. That's not because I can't afford my electricity bills, but because the cost of energy, plus the efficient ways we use that energy, is the basis of our prosperity, on average. That's a fundamental of economics. Low cost energy plus high efficiency usage is the best scenario. High cost energy plus low efficiency usage, is the worst scenario.

 

Australia's electricity prices have more than doubled during the past decade, compared with the average rate of inflation. That's bound to have an economic impact on businesses. It's no wonder that the wages of the average worker are not rising in Australia. If a company has to pay significantly more for electricity, it's difficult for them to also pay more for the labour they employ.

 

The cause of this rise in electricity prices is of course due to the move towards expensive, unreliable, renewable energy supplies, and the refusal to build new coal-fired power stations, employing the latest emission controls, to replace the old power stations which have been closed down.

 

The current, Liberal government doesn't have the majority in the Senate to do what is required to reduce energy costs, and the majority of Australians don't have the nous to understand the economic problems related to high energy prices.

 

The economy at present is not too bad, but I suspect the Labour party will win the next election and drag the economy down into a disaster during the next one or two terms. Hopefully this will eventually result in a future win for the Liberals, with a big majority, so they can do what's required to get the economy back into good shape.

 

Just speculating. I hope I'm wrong. ????

 

 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

The cause of this rise in electricity prices is of course due to the move towards expensive, unreliable, renewable energy supplies, and the refusal to build new coal-fired power stations, employing the latest emission controls, to replace the old power stations which have been closed down.

 

. ????

This is the kind of reflexive unthinking blame typical of right wingers. In fact, the biggest reason for the cost increase was misplaced and huge expenditures on building transmission networks.  The 2nd biggest was the increase in charges for billing and service.  These first 2 alone account for 65 percent of the increase. The third biggest is the retirement of old coal generating stations and their replacement with natural gas powered stations. Natural gas is insanely expensive in Australia thanks to government support of deals to send most of Australia's natural gas abroad. And coal powered stations with the latest emission controls are massively expensive propositions. And even then, they're just less filthy than the old coal stations. Not clean at all as regards emissions. Finally, in fourth place are environmental rules and badly thought out laws. You have to ask yourself why is that in the USA wind and solar are already cheaper than coal.

https://www.finder.com.au/australian-electricity-prices-rising-decade

[RJRS1301]

17 hours ago, keith101 said:

So the previous Finance Minister now Prime Minister has screwed the country who knew my hands up anyone else , the Liberal Party always screws the Aussie economy and the Labor Party always fixes it and only a Lib will deny it despite what the history books show .

He was Treasurer not finance minister .cormsn was Finance Minister 

[RJRS1301]

17 hours ago, Lacessit said:

The Victorian state election showed what the electorate thinks of fear and division tactics. 

Morrison is a moron. While not on a par with Abbott and that knighthood, his coal stunt in Parliament was a convincing demonstration of ineptitude.

Australian voters have repeatedly shown they will not elect a party riven with division and scandal. The Liberal/National parties are about to re-learn that lesson in a big way.

Now the Honourable Barnaby Joyce wants to be leader of the Nats again and open the coal debate and give free reign to mine farmlands and gasfields

[samran]

Americans reading this thread must be confused: ‘why are the liberals conservative?’ they must be asking!

[Olmate]

15 hours ago, car720 said:

Here is the problem.

Voting is compulsory in Australia.

However, how can any man who calls himself honourable be forced to chose between two proven liars?

We have lived off the sheep's back for too long now.  It will all dry up one day and then Australia will go down the hole faster than a greasy turd.

Sheep’s back ! Where u bin for the last 20 years ? 

[VincentRJ]

8 hours ago, bristolboy said:

This is the kind of reflexive unthinking blame typical of right wingers. In fact, the biggest reason for the cost increase was misplaced and huge expenditures on building transmission networks.  The 2nd biggest was the increase in charges for billing and service.  These first 2 alone account for 65 percent of the increase. The third biggest is the retirement of old coal generating stations and their replacement with natural gas powered stations. Natural gas is insanely expensive in Australia thanks to government support of deals to send most of Australia's natural gas abroad. And coal powered stations with the latest emission controls are massively expensive propositions. And even then, they're just less filthy than the old coal stations. Not clean at all as regards emissions. Finally, in fourth place are environmental rules and badly thought out laws. You have to ask yourself why is that in the USA wind and solar are already cheaper than coal.

https://www.finder.com.au/australian-electricity-prices-rising-decade

In other words, the main cause of the rapid price electricity rises in Australia is due the lack of political consensus on the alarm about CO2 emissions. The past Labour governments, with the help of the Greens, have tried to introduce carbon taxes, and the Liberal Coalition tends to think that CO2-induced climate change is a hoax, especially Tony Abbott.

 

To quote from the article you linked.
"The story of Australia's high electricity prices is not really one of private companies ripping off consumers. Nor is it a tale about the privatisation of an essential service. Rather, this is the story of a decade of policy drift and political failure.
Governments have been repeatedly warned about the need to tackle these problems, but have done very little.
Instead they have focused their energy on squabbling over climate policy. State governments have introduced inefficient schemes, scrapped them, and then introduced them again, while the federal government has discarded policies without even trying them.
The Coalition has rejected the Clean Energy Target recommended by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel. Labor will give no guarantee of support for the government's alternative policy, the National Energy Guarantee. Some politicians doubt the very idea that we need to act on climate change. Some states have given up on Canberra and are going it alone."

 

This is the kind of reflexive unthinking blame typical of right wingers. In fact, the biggest reason for the cost increase was misplaced and huge expenditures on building transmission networks.

 

Transmission networks are absolutely essential to delver reliable electricity to customers, without the availability of affordable battery storage. The problem is that the use of those transmission networks to deliver cheap and reliable electricity from coal-fired power stations has fallen dramatically because of the massive subsidies that have encouraged so many people to install solar panels on their roof.

 

You have to ask yourself why is that in the USA wind and solar are already cheaper than coal.

 

The answer is clear. Because the cost of producing electricity from coal has risen due to the closure of productive coal plants, and due to the lower use of existing coal plants as a result of the subsidized competition from wind and solar, and also because of the bias in the reports that wind and solar are cheaper. Such reports don't fully take into account the true cost of back-up supplies when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, and probably don't fully take into account the subsidies.

 

I'll give you an example of my situation in Australia. I've had solar panels on my roof for the past 9 years or so. I had them installed because the subsidized price was so attractive, but I don't have sufficient panels or battery storage to meet my full requirements for electricity. I have to rely upon the transmission network, or grid.

 

The peak price I get charged for the electricity I get from the grid is 33 cents/kWh. However, the surplus electricity generated by my solar panels, at any given moment, goes back into the grid for a credit of 55 cents/kWh. In other words, the electricity companies have spent billions of dollars providing a reliable network to deliver cheap energy to homes and businesses, but have to use those transmission networks to buy electricity from many of the consumers at very inflated wholesale prices which sometimes brings the electricity bill for a particular quarter down to zero, or even in credit.

 

Not that I'm complaining. It's the reason why my current electricity bill is affordable. But someone has to pay for this. There's no free lunch. Unfortunately, the entire Australia economy will pay for it, with rising debt and/or stagnating wages.
 

[monkeycu]

The LNP are nothing but a waste of oxygen.

The ones who are quitting before the election get to take home over $200,000 PER YEAR FOR LIFE.

To me and most pensioners that is a slap in the face, we loose our pension if we have worked hard and invested our money.

I have yet to see what any Liberal party has done that is a benefit to the country.

NSW Liberal Party is wasting so much on a couple of football stadiums, hospitals and schools would have been a better investment. 

With luck they will be redundant after March 23  

[bristolboy]

52 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

In other words, the main cause of the rapid price electricity rises in Australia is due the lack of political consensus on the alarm about CO2 emissions. The past Labour governments, with the help of the Greens, have tried to introduce carbon taxes, and the Liberal Coalition tends to think that CO2-induced climate change is a hoax, especially Tony Abbott.

 

To quote from the article you linked.
"The story of Australia's high electricity prices is not really one of private companies ripping off consumers. Nor is it a tale about the privatisation of an essential service. Rather, this is the story of a decade of policy drift and political failure.
Governments have been repeatedly warned about the need to tackle these problems, but have done very little.
Instead they have focused their energy on squabbling over climate policy. State governments have introduced inefficient schemes, scrapped them, and then introduced them again, while the federal government has discarded policies without even trying them.
The Coalition has rejected the Clean Energy Target recommended by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel. Labor will give no guarantee of support for the government's alternative policy, the National Energy Guarantee. Some politicians doubt the very idea that we need to act on climate change. Some states have given up on Canberra and are going it alone."

 

 

 

 

Transmission networks are absolutely essential to delver reliable electricity to customers, without the availability of affordable battery storage. The problem is that the use of those transmission networks to deliver cheap and reliable electricity from coal-fired power stations has fallen dramatically because of the massive subsidies that have encouraged so many people to install solar panels on their roof.

 

 

 

 

The answer is clear. Because the cost of producing electricity from coal has risen due to the closure of productive coal plants, and due to the lower use of existing coal plants as a result of the subsidized competition from wind and solar, and also because of the bias in the reports that wind and solar are cheaper. Such reports don't fully take into account the true cost of back-up supplies when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, and probably don't fully take into account the subsidies.

 

I'll give you an example of my situation in Australia. I've had solar panels on my roof for the past 9 years or so. I had them installed because the subsidized price was so attractive, but I don't have sufficient panels or battery storage to meet my full requirements for electricity. I have to rely upon the transmission network, or grid.

 

The peak price I get charged for the electricity I get from the grid is 33 cents/kWh. However, the surplus electricity generated by my solar panels, at any given moment, goes back into the grid for a credit of 55 cents/kWh. In other words, the electricity companies have spent billions of dollars providing a reliable network to deliver cheap energy to homes and businesses, but have to use those transmission networks to buy electricity from many of the consumers at very inflated wholesale prices which sometimes brings the electricity bill for a particular quarter down to zero, or even in credit.

 

Not that I'm complaining. It's the reason why my current electricity bill is affordable. But someone has to pay for this. There's no free lunch. Unfortunately, the entire Australia economy will pay for it, with rising debt and/or stagnating wages.
 

(Well, you have me at a disadvantage. The Thai Visa rules clearly say a maximum of 3 sentences can be quoted from an article. Odds are good the mods will eliminate your post. So I can't quote back any more from the article)

 

Stop making things up,  Nowhere in the discussion of transmission did that article say anything about the closure of coal plants affecting transmisssion cost. It gave 3 main reasons:

1)Faulty government overestimates of demand

2)Overly strict reliablity standards that greatly increased the cost of construction.

3)Government authorized 10% return on investment in construction of transmission networks whether needed or not.

 

The second biggest factor was government encouragement of retail competition. It drove costs up, not down. 

 

Together, these 2 factors accounted for 65% of the price increase of electricity. Nothing at all to do with environmental rules.

 

 

 

 

[VincentRJ]

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Stop making things up,  Nowhere in the discussion of transmission did that article say anything about the closure of coal plants affecting transmisssion cost. It gave 3 main reasons:

1)Faulty government overestimates of demand

2)Overly strict reliablity standards that greatly increased the cost of construction.

3)Government authorized 10% return on investment in construction of transmission networks whether needed or not.

 

The second biggest factor was government encouragement of retail competition. It drove costs up, not down. 

 

Together, these 2 factors accounted for 65% of the price increase of electricity. Nothing at all to do with environmental rules.

 

Well done! What an excellent example of 'denial'. That coal-fired power stations have been closed in recent years, without replacement, is a fact, whether or not your referenced article mentions it. I only deal in facts.

 

Attached below is an image showing a list of 9 coal plants that have been decommissioned during the past 6 years in Australia. Not one of them has been replaced.
The following article addresses the problem.

https://www.power-technology.com/features/new-coal-fired-power-australia-case-politics-practicality-2/

 

"Prior to last year’s local elections in Queensland, Australia last year, it was reported that a study outlining the viability of a new HELE coal-fired power plant was buried by the incumbent government, because, the opposition party argues, it didn’t fit their election agenda. The furore highlights the political baggage now attached to new coal power in Australia,; but could ideology hinder common- sense decision-making around the growing need to provide affordable and reliable energy?"  

 

The answer is a resounding yes.

 

For the benefit of those not familiar with the new coal plant technology, HELE stands for 'High Efficiency Low Emissions'. This is the latest technology. Usually, the older the coal plant the greater the harmful emissions, such as SO2 and particulate carbon. The Chinese have offered to build the new variety of HELE plants in Australia, but the opposition from the Greens and the Alarmists will probably prevent that from happening. If only we were as smart as the Chinese. ????

 

 

[VincentRJ]

Another fact for the denialists.

 

[ballpoint]

4 hours ago, car720 said:

but you still have to turn up, and for me, that is dancing to their tune.

Anyone who doesn't vote will be punished by being made to be the next PM.

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Another fact for the denialists.

 

First off, thanks for graciously acknowledging that fact that your claims about transmission costs being tied to the shutting down of coal fired plants was complete and utter BS.

Thanks also for acknowleding that most of the reason for the rise in costs for power in Australia has nothing to do with environmental rules and the cost of coal fired plants.

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

Well done! What an excellent example of 'denial'. That coal-fired power stations have been closed in recent years, without replacement, is a fact, whether or not your referenced article mentions it. I only deal in facts.

 

Attached below is an image showing a list of 9 coal plants that have been decommissioned during the past 6 years in Australia. Not one of them has been replaced.
The following article addresses the problem.

https://www.power-technology.com/features/new-coal-fired-power-australia-case-politics-practicality-2/

 

"Prior to last year’s local elections in Queensland, Australia last year, it was reported that a study outlining the viability of a new HELE coal-fired power plant was buried by the incumbent government, because, the opposition party argues, it didn’t fit their election agenda. The furore highlights the political baggage now attached to new coal power in Australia,; but could ideology hinder common- sense decision-making around the growing need to provide affordable and reliable energy?"  

 

The answer is a resounding yes.

 

For the benefit of those not familiar with the new coal plant technology, HELE stands for 'High Efficiency Low Emissions'. This is the latest technology. Usually, the older the coal plant the greater the harmful emissions, such as SO2 and particulate carbon. The Chinese have offered to build the new variety of HELE plants in Australia, but the opposition from the Greens and the Alarmists will probably prevent that from happening. If only we were as smart as the Chinese. ????

 

 

No one is disputing that coal plants have been shut down. So why exactly did you bother with this graph? The question isn't whether or not coal plants have been shut down but what that has to do with the sharp rise in power costs. Nothing you produce here has any probative value at all in that regard. 

Once again: Most of the increases for Australian power has zero nada zilch to do with environmental rules.

 

As for your assertions about HELE plants. They are about 10% more efficient than older plants at converting coal to electricity. Since they burn about 10% less fuel, they emit about 10% less emissions. Emission controls are a separate and expensive add-on.

"The average emissions intensity (weighted by electricity production) for the two technologies are:

• super-critical, or HELE (‘clean coal’) — 919 kg CO2-e/MWh
• subcritical, or non-HELE — 1011 kg CO2-e/MWh.

Therefore Australian power stations fitted with ‘Clean Coal’ technology emit 9.95% less pollution than stations burning the same fuel with sub-critical technology."

https://reneweconomy.com.au/clean-australias-clean-coal-power-stations-14224/

The link above also goes into plans for more advanced power plants and shows that to make meaningul cuts in pollution would require hugely expensive plants. Just more hype from the coal industry.

 

 

[dreaming]

5 hours ago, car720 said:

but you still have to turn up, and for me, that is dancing to their tune.

It is only to the nearest state school, not too hard. 

[bristolboy]

59 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Another fact for the denialists.

 

In India banks are refusing to lend money to privately owned power generator who want to build or upgrade their power plants.  They see the handwriting on the wall. It's only the Indian government that's now building plants. And that's because of who their political supporters are:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/energy/power/banks-refuse-lending-to-private-power-companies-for-parts-upgrade/articleshow/65466758.cms

Solar energy is killing coal:

India’s renewable rush puts coal on the back burner

The renewable push attracted major investors such as Japan’s SoftBank, whose consortium last year sealed a deal that stunned the industry. It agreed to sell power from a northern Indian solar park for Rs2.44 per unit — well below the cost of coal power, which typically costs well over Rs3.This shift in the industry’s economics means that coal power — once one of the hottest prospects for Indian industrialists — is now a space where most fear to tread. 

https://www.ft.com/content/b8d24c94-fde7-11e8-aebf-99e208d3e521

 

[VincentRJ]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

First off, thanks for graciously acknowledging that fact that your claims about transmission costs being tied to the shutting down of coal fired plants was complete and utter BS.

Thanks also for acknowleding that most of the reason for the rise in costs for power in Australia has nothing to do with environmental rules and the cost of coal fired plants.

I can only assume you are not Australian. Right? As of December 2018, about 2 million homes in Australia had solar panels on the roof. Most of those homes are connected to the grid, or the Transmission Networks, which cost money to build and maintain, and were built for the purpose of delivering electricity to the homes from mostly coal-fired power stations.

 

The billing companies also have to employ people to drive around taking readings from the meter boxes every 3 months, to submit the quarterly bill to the customer.

 

Can you imagine how small those electricity bills will be for the average home that has solar panels. Often it will be close to zero or even a credit to the customer. That wouldn't even pay for the cost of taking a reading from the meter box.

 

Is it surprising that electricity costs have to rise, in order to pay for the running of the coal plants and the maintenance of the transmission networks? Why are you having difficulty understanding this?

 

Of course, there are other issues involved, such as the inflated gas prices within Australia because of the domination of the gas export market, which is making it more expensive than it could be to provide back-up power for solar and wind. Coal plants are not ideal for back-up purposes because they take too long to start up and shut down.

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

I can only assume you are not Australian. Right? As of December 2018, about 2 million homes in Australia had solar panels on the roof. Most of those homes are connected to the grid, or the Transmission Networks, which cost money to build and maintain, and were built for the purpose of delivering electricity to the homes from mostly coal-fired power stations.

 

The billing companies also have to employ people to drive around taking readings from the meter boxes every 3 months, to submit the quarterly bill to the customer.

 

Can you imagine how small those electricity bills will be for the average home that has solar panels. Often it will be close to zero or even a credit to the customer. That wouldn't even pay for the cost of taking a reading from the meter box.

 

Is it surprising that electricity costs have to rise, in order to pay for the running of the coal plants and the maintenance of the transmission networks? Why are you having difficulty understanding this?

 

Of course, there are other issues involved, such as the inflated gas prices within Australia because of the domination of the gas export market, which is making it more expensive than it could be to provide back-up power for solar and wind. Coal plants are not ideal for back-up purposes because they take too long to start up and shut down.

As noted in that article, environmental laws and regulations played a much smaller part in rate rises then transmission costs thanks to overbuilding and too stringent buidling standard,  and the introduction of market forces through retail competition.  Together alone they accounted for 65 percent of the increase in costs. Why do you have trouble understanding that hard number?