"Thousands of anti-war protesters clashed with police outside the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre, disrupting the Land Forces International Defence Expo. The demonstration, one of Melbourne's largest in decades, saw protesters throw projectiles and manure at police, who responded with pepper spray and batons. Over 25,000 demonstrators rallied against the weapons expo, with tensions escalating as officers on horseback attempted to control the crowd. Traffic chaos ensued, and several protesters were arrested. " The Australian, Sep 11 2024
Featured post
Why can't everyone condemn Hamas?
Following Hamas' atrocities in Israel, the media are awash with commentary, so I will keep my comments short. I am shocked by the willin...
Monday 16 September 2024
Appeasement leads to escalation
Monday 2 September 2024
China announces first commercial Thorium Molten Salt Reactor!
Sunday 18 August 2024
What about Sudan?
Amid the global cacophony surrounding the conflict between Hamas and Israel in Gaza, a silent catastrophe unfolds in Sudan. The famine currently threatening the lives of 2.5 million Sudanese has received a fraction of the attention that the Gaza conflict has garnered. This disparity in media coverage and public outcry raises critical questions about our collective priorities and the value we place on human lives.
The Stark Contrast
The death toll in Gaza, while significant, pales in comparison to the humanitarian disaster in Sudan. In Gaza, the conflict has resulted in thousands of civilian casualties, a tragic consequence of a war initiated by Hamas. These deaths, though devastating, are largely unintentional and a result of the ongoing military operations. In contrast, the famine in Sudan is a direct result of political actors stealing food and resources, leading to a preventable crisis where people are dying from starvation.
No Famine in Gaza, But One in Sudan
While Gaza faces severe hardships due to the conflict, it does not suffer from famine. The situation in Sudan, however, is dire. The famine has reached catastrophic levels, with millions facing acute food insecurity. The lack of food is not due to natural causes but is exacerbated by the actions of warring factions who prioritize their power struggles over the lives of civilians. This stark difference highlights the severity of the crisis in Sudan, which is being overshadowed by the more politically charged conflict in Gaza.
Silence on Sudan
Despite the grave situation in Sudan, there is a deafening silence from the international community and media. The famine, which is claiming lives daily, has not sparked the same level of outrage or mobilization as the Gaza conflict. In Western cities, there are widespread demonstrations and vocal condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza. Yet, the plight of the Sudanese people, who are dying from hunger, goes largely unnoticed. This discrepancy in attention and action is troubling and calls into question the consistency of our humanitarian values.
The Question of Black Lives
The global movement for racial justice, epitomized by the slogan “Black Lives Matter,” demands that we confront systemic inequalities and value all human lives equally. However, the relative silence on the Sudanese famine suggests a troubling inconsistency. If black lives truly matter, why are the deaths of Sudanese people being ignored? The lack of attention to Sudan’s crisis reflects a broader issue of selective empathy and the need for a more equitable approach to humanitarian crises.
Why is Sudan being ignored?
The famine in Sudan is a humanitarian disaster that deserves immediate and sustained attention. While the conflict in Gaza is undoubtedly tragic and complex, it should not overshadow the even more urgent crisis in Sudan. The international community, media, and public must recognize the severity of the famine and mobilize resources and support to save lives. By doing so, we can begin to address the imbalance in our responses to global crises and reaffirm our commitment to valuing all human lives equally.
Tuesday 9 July 2024
Mythbusting Energy claims
The opposition under Peter Dutton has made nuclear energy the foundation of the Coalition's low-emission policy. This change in energy policy for the coalition came rather late in the electoral cycle, with an election due in the next 12 months, and after the Labor government has committed significant resources to an extremely expensive rapid decarbonisation based on renewables, wind and solar.
Monday 8 July 2024
The Hidden Costs of Renewable Energy
In Australia, the debate has gained greater intensity following the Coalition opposition parties declaring their policy to include nuclear power in the energy mix. This is a direct denial of the Labor government's anti-nuclear stance. With a federal election now due in less than 12 months, the debate is in full swing. Into this debate the IPA (the Institute of Public Affairs) has lobbed a detailed report by Professor Stephen Wilson titled “The Ruinous Cost Of Free Energy: Why An Electricity System Built On Renewables Is The Most Expensive Of All Options” The report presents a direct challenge to the Labor governments oft-repeated claims that renewables is the cheapest form of energy and nuclear is the most expensive. It is well worth reading the full report, but here are the key points of his analysis.
Historical Context: From Low to High Electricity Prices
Australia once enjoyed some of the lowest electricity prices in the industrialized world. This was largely due to its reliance on baseload generation, primarily from coal. However, the shift towards renewable energy has led to a dramatic increase in electricity costs. Today, Australia has some of the highest electricity prices globally.
The Concept of Total System Cost
Wilson emphasizes the importance of considering the Total System Cost when evaluating energy systems. This concept goes beyond the simple cost of generating electricity and includes all associated expenses, such as infrastructure, storage, and transmission2. According to Wilson, a system based on renewable energy sources like wind and solar is significantly more expensive than one based on baseload generation, such as coal or nuclear power.
Infrastructure Investments
One of the primary reasons for the high cost of renewable energy systems is the substantial infrastructure investments required. Wind and solar power generation necessitates extensive infrastructure, including storage facilities and transmission networks. These investments are essential to manage the variability of renewable energy sources and ensure a stable supply of electricity.
The Challenge of Variability
Renewable energy sources are inherently variable. The sun doesn’t always shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow. This variability poses a significant challenge for maintaining a stable electricity supply. To balance the grid, additional costs are incurred to manage these fluctuations. This often involves using backup power sources, such as gas turbines, which can quickly ramp up production when renewable output drops.
Impact on Consumers
Ultimately, the higher costs associated with renewable energy systems are passed on to consumers. Wilson argues that the increased infrastructure, storage, and grid balancing expenses result in higher electricity bills for households and businesses. This contradicts the common perception that renewable energy is a cheaper alternative.
Comparing Costs: Renewable vs. Baseload Systems
Wilson provides a stark comparison between the costs of renewable and baseload energy systems. He estimates that a renewables-based system could be two to three times more expensive than a baseload system. Furthermore, a ‘renewables only’ system could be five to six times more expensive. These figures highlight the significant financial burden that a transition to renewable energy could impose on society.
The Myth of Free Energy
The term “free energy” is often used to describe renewable energy sources. However, Wilson argues that this is a misleading concept. While the sun and wind are free, the process of converting these natural resources into usable electricity is far from cost-free. The infrastructure, maintenance, and grid management required to support renewable energy systems come with substantial expenses.
The Role of Government Policies
Government policies play a crucial role in shaping the energy landscape. Subsidies and incentives for renewable energy have driven significant investment in wind and solar power. However, Wilson suggests that these policies may not always consider the full economic impact. By focusing on the apparent benefits of renewable energy, policymakers might overlook the hidden costs that consumers ultimately bear.
The Need for a Balanced Approach
Wilson’s analysis underscores the need for a balanced approach to energy policy. While renewable energy has its merits, it should not be pursued at the expense of economic stability. A diversified energy mix that includes baseload generation can provide a more reliable and cost-effective solution. This approach ensures that the benefits of renewable energy are harnessed without imposing undue financial burdens on consumers.
Conclusion: Rethinking Renewable Energy
Stephen Wilson’s article challenges the prevailing narrative that renewable energy is the most cost-effective solution for the future. By highlighting the hidden costs and complexities associated with renewable energy systems, he calls for a more nuanced understanding of the energy landscape. As we move towards a sustainable future, it is essential to consider the full economic impact of our energy choices and strive for a balanced and pragmatic approach.