Retards Rooning Renewables - starting with Origin Energy
Well between reading physics, engineering articles and the common crap articles that some star has a hole in their arse in the idiot media, and kicking the crap out of Merkin Corporations online.... (Microsoft do you hear me??), I decided to go scoot booting across the net on Origin Energy.
Firstly -
My ONLY objection to wind farms is living within blade shedding distance of the fuckers.
Kind of like going way too fast around a corner in the wet.... or pitching tents under huge gum trees....
So fuck it - build away........
I love Joe Hockey.
I adore the man.
I want to have all his babies and ... well not really.
He is my total inspiration for both fucking off Origin Energy AND now paying ONLY for the premium rate RENEWABLE power from wind farms.
I want to pay for current and future growth in the renewable industry.
I consider this to be making an investment in my and everyone else's future.
It's kind of like paying for a premium technical service, and the employment of capable people, in my own country, instead of off-shoring the job to a foreign call centre - who employ dumb fucks that can't speak english.
I'd rather pay MORE for a standard, than scumming away on the bottom dollar deals with the worst outcomes.
How does Joe Hockey help me improve the planet? By being living proof that you too can be the most honest man that money can buy:
At face value - with no real indepth examination - the liberals - I think have come up with some great things.
I just really do not think it goes far enough, fast enough.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-20/coalition-climate-change-direct-action-policy-explained/5067188
What is the Coalition's direct action climate change policy?
Updated
The Government wants to replace Labor's carbon tax with its direct action plan, which would provide financial incentives for polluters to reduce emissions.
The Government has released a white paper that details how the centrepiece of the policy - the Emissions Reduction Fund - will operate.The Emissions Reduction Fund is budgeted to cost $2.55 billion over four years, starting on July 1, 2014.
Both the Coalition and Labor support a reduction of Australia's emissions to 5 per cent below 2000 levels by 2020.
While both Labor and the Coalition agree on the same reduction target, they disagree on the mechanism.
Coalition policy key points
- Keep the 5 per cent emission reduction target
- Scrap the price on carbon and associated corporations
- Establish a $2.55 billion fund to pay businesses for emission reduction projects
- Create a 15,000 strong Green Army to conduct conservation work
Under Labor's carbon pricing, the country's biggest polluters pay for the amount of pollution they produce, giving them an incentive to reduce emissions.
Compensation is paid to taxpayers to help mitigate any price increases, such as the cost of electricity, that have been passed on.
But under the Coalition, businesses will compete to win tenders and be paid to undertake emission reduction projects.
The Government argues that this is the cheapest method to reduce emissions and is better for the economy than a nationwide "electricity tax".
In late 2013, Environment Minister Greg Hunt said the amount of emissions reduction needed to achieve that target would be less than first thought due to the closures of a number of manufacturing businesses and coal mines.
The Government's white paper, released on April 24, 2014, said Australia faced "a cumulative emissions reduction task of 591 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents in the period to 2020".
Australia accounts for about 1.3 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions and is the 15th largest emitter in the world.
The largest contributor to Australia's emissions is electricity generation, accounting for 35 per cent of total emissions.
How the Emissions Reduction Fund works
The main feature of the direct action policy is the creation of an Emissions Reduction Fund, which will cost $3 billion over four years.The fund will call for businesses to submit tenders for projects that will either lower emissions or offset them.
It will operate as a reverse auction, where businesses compete and undercut each other to win a contract and with it, the Government's money.
Auctions will be run by the Clean Energy Regulator and are set to begin in the second half of 2014. They will take place quarterly.
The Government says the scheme will ensure a reduction of emissions for the best possible price.
The reverse auction method mirrors the existing National Water Market, which conducts water buybacks to increase river flows.
Emission reductions will be achieved through a range of projects, such as cleaning up power stations, capturing landfill gas, reforesting marginal lands or improving soil carbon.A project needs to meet two criteria to win a contract from the fund:
- The emission reductions must be additional measures and not just business-as-usual
- The reduction estimates must be credible and verified
Only the projects with the lowest cost per amount of abatement will be taken on by the reduction fund.
The fund is capped and Prime Minster Tony Abbott has previously indicated it will not be increased if the 2020 emission reduction target is not being reached.
The Government will review its international emission reduction target in 2015 in line with other countries.
As well as this, operational elements of the Emissions Reduction Fund will be reviewed near the end of 2015.
Green Army
The Coalition aims to build an environmental workforce made up of 15,000 young people to undertake conservation projects.The "Green Army" will carry out projects such as re-vegetating sand dunes, cleaning up riverbanks, weed control and regenerating local parks.
The workforce will work with and complement local groups such as Landcare, catchment authorities and councils.
Projects will be tailored to local environmental priorities.
Participants in the Green Army (initially only 17-24 year olds) will be paid a training allowance and the Government expects young people to gain valuable work skills from the group.
The training received will count towards the requirements for a Certificate 1 or 2 in land management, park management, landscaping or horticulture.
Full-time projects will run for up to 26 weeks in groups of 10 - nine participants and a supervisor.
Teams will be given money to pay for equipment and materials needed to undertake a project.
The program will begin in 2014-15 with 250 projects, which will be scaled up to 1,500 projects and a 15,000 strong workforce in 2018-19.
It is expected to cost $50 million in its first year and then $300 million over a four-year period.
What is the emission reduction target?
The Government is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 5 per cent below 2000 levels by 2020.There is some debate over whether the target is ambitious enough to keep up with action by other countries.
In October 2013, the Labor-initiated independent climate policy advisor, the Climate Change Authority, said the target was inadequate.
The authority, which is to be scrapped under the Coalition Government, said in a report that a higher target would mean Australia would not need to drastically catch up later to fulfil its fair international role.
It recommended either a 15 or 25 per cent reduction by 2020.
But the Government says its target will not be modified until it sees the outcome of the 2015 Climate Summit in Paris.
What is the Renewable Energy Target?
The Coalition is reviewing the Renewable Energy Target (RET), currently set at 20 per cent by 2020, and which is required by legislation to be reviewed every two years.The target was supported by Labor.
The Coalition has committed to axing the $10 billion green loans bank, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which invests in clean energy projects by co-financing with the private sector.
Solar panel rebates will be given to low-income households under the Coalition, with a cap on 100,000 rebates a year.
Sources: Emission Reduction Fund green paper & white paper. Graphs from ERF white paper.
This had me in the shit fits and giggles...
http://wpcunt.wordpress.com/2014/03/09/origin-energy-cunts-bullshit-fucktards/
origin energy – cunts – bullshit fucktards
your so typical of the useless incompetence that i encounter in every interaction with society, no wonder terrorists do shit against you, and if they don’t, they should, your so fucking useless, i live in a unit, not a shop, its a residence not a fucking commercial property, also, get my fucking address right, the OLD address is not now my mailing address it is still the place that i fucking moved out of, and the new address is where i moved into, obviously you don’t know your fucking ass from your fucking elbow.
totally incompetent.
And this was Uber LOL's too.
https://plus.google.com/+PaulPavlinovich/posts/iQLqLTCEJng
Paul Pavlinovich
Shared publicly - Sep 25, 2013So, Origin Energy - how come I just got a bill and a disconnection notice in the same envelope? How come both are due today? I know you're economising and all so you've got more loot for your overseas owners to roll around in but how does go fuck yourself sound?
If you're in Victoria, who are you using and how much are you paying per kw/h - do you get a discount of any kind? Do they let you roll gas and power together?
Time for a change.
If you're in Victoria, who are you using and how much are you paying per kw/h - do you get a discount of any kind? Do they let you roll gas and power together?
Time for a change.
But this was NOT funny:
And the comments are great - yes the "stupid consumers" are seeing straight through the greedy corporate bullshit, the word games and the management fucking it all up and then trying to screw the consumer via legislation and their glove puppet buddies in the guvmint - and the people are applying the boots.
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/origin-71167
Origin says renewables not supposed to displace fossil fuels
By Giles Parkinson on 2 June 2014
Origin Energy, which has been one of the leading opponents of the current fixed target of 41,000GWh – at least since it appeared that electricity demand would be lower than predicted – has repeated its call to turn the RET into a “true” 20 per cent target.
It says that when 41,000GWh was fixed – at the insistence of the major retailers such as Origin, it should be noted – it was assumed that demand would be much higher than current expectations.
“The RET was expected to fill part of the required new generation needed to meet this demand and was not expected to crowd out any existing generation,” Origin writes in its submission to the RET Review panel.
It includes this chart to illustrate what it sees as a major problem – mothballed capacity, unused fossil fuel generation, brown and black coal as well as gas.
“The RET distorts the wholesale market by forcing additional genertion hat is no required into the system,” Origin Energy says. This would force fossil fuel capacity to be withdrawn, and black coal and gas generation is likely to be most affected (due to their higher costs over brown coal and the removal of the carbon price).
Origin Energy owns black coal power stations, such as Eraring, which last year operated at a capacity factor of just 38 per cent, lower than many wind farms, and gas generation, including the recently built Darling Downs base-load gas generator that has been forced to act as a peaking plant due to changes in the market.
It says capacity is likely to be withdrawn from the market because of the decline in demand exacerbated by the RET.
To address this issue, Origin Energy wants the RET changed from the current target to a real 20 per cent target, and the large and small scale schemes rolled into one.
It says this would effectively mean cutting the target from 41,000GWh (plus uncapped rooftop solar), to 23,000GWh (including rooftop solar).
That would mean cutting the planned construction of wind farms from 3,800MW to 1,500MW, and the anticipated deployment of solar PV from 7,000MW to 3,000MW.
It wants the small scale solar scheme (SRES) removed, and upfront payments for rooftop solar stopped. Or, it says, the small scale scheme should be reduced to systems of just 5kW or below. It notes that the average size of household solar systems currently deployed in Australia is 4kW.
It's just a shame for these ineffectual vertically-integrated market 'leaders'. They had the same market opportunity as households did to create rooftop PV and benefit by STCs to offset their legal liabilities. But then they lost their nerve.
-
Comments
Post a Comment