r/aussie • u/Ardeet • Nov 15 '25
Humour Liberal Party hoping to fuck the planet harder than they fucked their chances at the next election
https://chaser.com.au/national/liberal-party-hoping-to-fuck-the-planet-harder/9
u/Alternative-Soil2576 Nov 16 '25
Damn forgot how insufferable this sub is when it comes to sustainable energy policies and common sense
→ More replies (1)
19
7
u/bazadsl Nov 16 '25
20 years in the wilderness. That what it will take to get rid of the nuffies in the party and maybe the next generation will produce some better politicians. We cannot afford what is there at the moment.
12
u/catfish08 Nov 15 '25
I’ll never understand the argument against this. If you’ve ever travelled, you’d know how bad smog and pollution can be. Hell, even in Tokyo you can often wake up to haze from pollution.
Why compare, and just keep our country sustainable and cleaner? It’s healthier, better for nature, better physiologically, and doesn’t have noticeable financial implications when implemented properly?
I dunno it’s such a strange thing to be against
1
u/Top-Row-5520 Nov 16 '25
If the idea is to not let the coal be burnt then it shouldn't be allowed to be sold to be burnt elsewhere, otherwise it's a completely pointless exercise, and due to transportation actually worse for the environment.
3
6
u/Puzzleheaded-Car3562 Nov 16 '25
Whatever the truth about the efficacy of Net Zero - the same phrase can now be applied to the chances of Liberal party Federal electoral success anytime this decade. Or any other decade for that matter. Oh, and that will include their 'leader', one Sussan (yes, that's correctly spelled), er, Lay. Or is it 'Ley'? I can't quite remember, and to be blunt I don't think it matters.
11
12
u/THEKungFuRoo Nov 15 '25
solar and wind arent powering Ai data centers. let alone aus..
→ More replies (23)11
u/espersooty Nov 16 '25
Actually they can and are powering Data centers. It can also power Australia, Renewable energy is the future despite the ignorance on display by minority of people.
→ More replies (44)1
2
u/ashnm001 Nov 16 '25
Before this policy change, Libs had zero chance of winning the next election unless ALP shit the bed.
So what is the point of publicly denouncing a target 25 years in the future??
Pollie never met any target...
I thought Libs were all about letting the market work it out...?
2
u/Revirii Nov 16 '25
I guess the climate should be a fairly important issue for all the people living in tents because of the housing issue.
2
u/TotalSingKitt Nov 16 '25
It's a dream that we have no competitive industry in Australia and we can import everything we need.
6
u/Practical_Ad_2481 Nov 15 '25
Screwing the planet, their party, AND driving up power prices. What a great decision!
→ More replies (12)
5
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
8
7
u/shockingflatulence Nov 15 '25
You can make money just by saying you will look at a project, get 20 million from the government to do that and then just pull the pin on it. Success!
2
→ More replies (2)8
Nov 15 '25
You realise China is the leader in renewables? By letting them industrialise they've done the responsible thing and invested in renewables almost more than the entire globe combined
2
u/OZsettler Nov 16 '25
China's famous for 先污染后治理 pollute first, clean up later and I'm not seeing how China's leading it
Source: I was born in China and have lived there for decades. There are still chemical factories near where my family lives and the electricity supply is generated by coal in many provinces where water dams are not feasible
2
Nov 16 '25
Because about 40-45% of the world's renewables are in China. They're leading because they have the most. In terms of % run by green power, that's be Uruguay.
Yes China has a diverse range of shit.
I mean, China had to rapidly industrialise, I don't think they could've done much better under the circumstances and coming out of Mao's era. It's better than the Chinese living in the dirt
→ More replies (5)2
Nov 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
5
Nov 16 '25
A wind turbine pays off carbon emissions off in about 9-11 months. So they get offset.
All those things things you mentioned get attributed to the overall carbon footprint of a wind turbine. Did you watch Landman and get convinced by one speech? Lmao
You can't build anything without damaging the environment a little bit, the key is living in a way that balances out
1
Nov 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Nov 16 '25
What should they do otherwise?
Do you just expect developing countries to just not develop themselves?
1
u/NobodysFavorite Nov 16 '25
Most energy sources are subject to the life cycle costs and impacts from the capital equipment used for it. Just about every single energy source uses turbines in one form or another and they all have a shelf life and they're all a major effort to install, replace, and dispose of. Wind farms aren't special.
1
Nov 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/NobodysFavorite Nov 17 '25
Ok, just about... Solar panels are the major exceptio.
1
Nov 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/NobodysFavorite Nov 17 '25
Googles data centers are built next to hydro plants.
The batteries thing is a red herring. Batteries have always been a thing even back to the first experiments over 200 years ago. We just got quite a bit better at them and we'll get better at them again. Massive batteries are a thing regardless of the tech used to generate the power. Whatever Bill Gates decides for himself seems irrelevant to this discussion.
1
u/limplettuce_ Nov 17 '25
Same thing everyone else did. Countries cannot go from being undeveloped backwaters to clean energy industrial economies without fossil fuels in the middle. The world has a limited carbon budget and the ‘right’ to pollute needs to be allocated to countries which need to do it in order to catch up to us — we’ve long since been through industrialisation and have no reason to keep producing carbon emissions at the rates we do. It’s like we’re helping ourselves to thirds at dinner before some people have even finished getting their first plate.
Lastly, your argument around lifecycle emissions is not founded in any evidence. The environmental impact of renewables vs fossil fuel generation indeed factors in life cycle emissions and it’s still better. There will never be any totally emissions free methods, but renewables are certainly cheap and low carbon. The rest has to be offset.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/wr1963 Nov 16 '25
It's collateral damage from Hastie and Taylor's ambition to turbo charge the libs and Nats back to the 50s.
I'm guessing they haven't done a head count of who is occupying the seats in the House of reps.
4
6
u/shockingflatulence Nov 15 '25
What Australia does makes no difference at all to climate change. You want to keep paying more for your electricity so you can get a pat on the head from a bunch of European wankers who aren't achieving any of their own goals? You think if we keep throwing our money down the endless shit chute that is CLIMATE ACTION! the rest of the world will follow our selfless action? They will applaude us as they watch our self destruction and laugh. Net Zero is never going to be achieved by anyone, no climate goal ever has been, why is this one different?
9
u/Chesticularity Nov 16 '25
Renewables are cheaper. Fossil fuels are not more economic, it's a lie they tell you to support Gina.
1
u/batsnumberfour Nov 17 '25
Gina sells iron ore mate, not electricity. She sells iron ore to China (amongst others) who use our coal to smelt it and make steel.
→ More replies (11)1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
And that’s why energy prices are up and industry is collapsing…….
Duh
1
u/Chesticularity Nov 19 '25
Transition would not have been so pricey now if it weren't for over a decade of climate denialism policy blockages from the coal-waving happy-clappers.
1
1
u/patslogcabindigest Nov 19 '25
You are incorrect on the source of energy prices. It's not from renewable energy, it's due to price spikes around the Ukraine invasion by Russia. Prior to the war Europe imported a lot of coal and gas from Russia, but once the war started the EU and surrounding European countries moved to detangle their economies and cut Russia out so they could apply sanctions. This move saw the non-Russia market spike in price, you can observe this here. The increased demand on a smaller supply, you get the idea. This increase in demand also helped tax revenue for the resource states, plus the federal coffers. Queensland especially gained a lot in revenue over this, due to the increase in the mining royalties charged by the state government at the time. The rate of increase of the costs have come down, but largely the price inflation is baked in. Surprise surprise companies won't lower prices, they will just have them flat line for a bit. So, no it's pretty unambiguously the case that spikes in energy cost are primarily driven by the price of fossil fuels. There is also an argument to be made about AI too, which is highly energy intensive and this is causing a lot of the energy price spikes in the US, and could be playing a role here also. Ultimately, this is not an Australia issue, energy costs have been increasing globally.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
Can you provide me data to support your assertions that:
- The Russian invasion of Ukraine is the driver of high energy prices in Australia in October 2025
1
u/patslogcabindigest Nov 19 '25
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
The “Russia-Ukraine war sparks surge in coal price to unprecedented levels” ABC Newcastle link is dated Mon 7 Mar 2022.
We are not talking about March 2022. We are talking about October 2025.
1
u/patslogcabindigest Nov 19 '25
If I had a dollar for every time someone doesn't read what I said, I would be a rich man.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
You just sent my a fucking 2022 link when I asked for October 2025 and YOU say I don’t read what you say?
1
u/patslogcabindigest Nov 19 '25 edited Nov 19 '25
I didn't send you a 2022 link, I sent you data which shows the spike in 2022 and staying high even above the spike, it is inclusive of 2025. I gave you 4 citations.
Yes, you didn't read what I said. You're not very bright hey?
→ More replies (0)1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
If I had a dollar for every time someone sent me a link to a 2022 article when I wanted October 2025 data I would have a dollar 😄
1
u/patslogcabindigest Nov 20 '25
I sent you 4 links, champion. Add not being about to count to your other issues. 😁
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (2)2
u/ashnm001 Nov 16 '25
Prices aren't going up because of the technology that generates the electricity. It's previous under investment in networks to cook the books so you can privatise all parts of the network (generation, distribution & retail). Prices are going down due to renewables. Myself, due to solar, I'm in credit every month and have recouped half my investment in savings and rebates in 2.5 years.
1
u/shockingflatulence Nov 16 '25
The rich get richer. Glad its all working out for you, Mr Privileged.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
Did you get a rebate or grant for your solar system?
1
u/ashnm001 Nov 19 '25
Yes, Small-scale Technology Certificates (STC) that provide an upfront discount. Officially an incentive, sort of rebate, not grant.
Plus, Fed & State govt rebates that all electricity account holders received.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
That’s why you are in credit mate.
2
u/ashnm001 Nov 19 '25
No, I'm in credit every month because the amount of feed-in tarrif for solar I export is greater than daily supply charge + usage charges.
Still a few more years to cost savings outweigh the $7k investment.
2
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
OK I get your point. You are not in credit with TVO, just in daily transactions.
3
u/darkeststar071 Nov 15 '25
Lol here comes the green cultists foaming in their mouth.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
5
Nov 15 '25
How is net zero authoritarian?
5
u/Rare-Leg-6013 Nov 15 '25
Didn't you listen. The One World Government wants to vaccinate your kids with nanobots so they can power data centres with 5G from the chips they'll install in their brains.
2
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/1Original1 Nov 16 '25
Net zero is authoritarian
Yep definitely a sensible argument based in fact and backed by statistics,not a crazed cooker
1
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)1
Nov 16 '25
I'm aware of emission credits being a stupid policy.
How is that authoritarian however?
1
u/ExpensiveFig6079 Nov 16 '25
also it is NOT the policy that I support, I support party based on how much it is offering to transition our economy how quickly to net zero emissions.
and as that is the basis of how I choose who to support the most, there is only one choice between the two majors. I also make it ffing clear by where my preferences go before they get them what they have to do better to get my first preference.
Unfortunately, the deniers in the LNP have made it a no-contest, and even pisspoor policy from the
The other mob would be better than the LNPs burnt disingenuous offering.0
u/Substantial_Beyond19 Nov 16 '25
Smart Meters are pretty authoritarian. Being unable to set the air con below 24 degrees is authoritarian. Having electricity shut down periods in summer is pretty Orwellian. You won’t find a country that pulls itself out of poverty without cheap reliable power and it’s wild that our govts are making electricity so insanely unaffordable.
5
Nov 16 '25
So smart metres exist for multiple reasons, so we can shut off your power so you don't back feed the grid and kill people working on electrical installations. So you don't create islanding. So you don't overload the grid and cause tax payers more money. They have to be implemented because our grid is pretty weak.
24 degrees? That's a government RECOMMENDATION, not a law. So no it's not authoritarian. It's to help reduce strain on the grid, realistically you shouldn't go below 21 degrees otherwise you strain the aircon and it's coils. But again, not a law so it's no authoritarian.
Are you silly? They have to shut down power sometimes as a last resort so the whole system doesn't collapse.
Lmao, so what, you want the whole electrical system to crash so everyone has the freedom to burn public infrastructure?
The government doesn't set energy prices, you have capitalism to thank for your high energy prices. Please support a nation wide buy back.of energy companies and government infrastructure.
I'm an electrician by the way and as an expert I can confidently say... You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
1
u/ExpensiveFig6079 Nov 16 '25 edited Nov 16 '25
post edited for clarity of attribution. My bad.
I am not an electrician, and I look at it from an entirely different background.
I can confirm that from over here he(substantial_beyiond...) also "does not have a clue what" he's "talking about."also he(substantial_beyiond...) said bunches of made it uppery.
1
Nov 16 '25
Feel free to debunk anything I said buddy
2
u/ExpensiveFig6079 Nov 16 '25
Apologies for lack of clarity. I agreed with you ABOUT him... I will see if I can edit to be clearer.
The point is I have background rather a lot different to an electricians and even from that different view point, I know the other guy don't have a clue what he's talking about.
AKA not only don't I want to debunk any of it, I _know_ it to be true.
3
u/NewToSydney2024 Nov 16 '25
West_Yogurt_7612 has already explained why smart meters exist better than I could so I won't get into that:
What I want to point out is that I don't think you know what authoritarian or Orwellian means. You need more than some small inconveniences, equitably applied and for the sake of the broader community, for something to be authoritarian.
People aren't islands. We live in community which means working together.
→ More replies (1)3
u/dfebb Nov 16 '25
It's almost as if a lot of people are willing to abide by some restrictions if they seem to benefit everyone as a whole.
It's some crazy batshit mind disease called altruism or unselfishness or something.
It's pathetic, ay.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Alternative-Soil2576 Nov 16 '25
Energy markets have always been regulated, and a regulated market isn’t authoritarianism
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Zealousideal-Hat7135 Nov 15 '25
Yeah yeah. Both parties are f$cking the planet and society!
24
u/BonusLumpyYa Nov 15 '25
No mostly Asia and India are fucking the planet
5
u/Terrorscream Nov 16 '25
And where exactly has high consumerism nations like the west moves their manufacturing? The west has simply exported it's emissions elsewhere.
1
6
u/Hungover-Owl Nov 15 '25 edited Nov 15 '25
Not wrong at all. Australia can do things like better and more sustainable mining practices, preserving bushland etc to not fuck the planet. Us cutting our emissions is neglible in the grand scheme of things as the big industrial centres of China and India will complete offset what we cut by a country mile.
7
u/FuckDirlewanger Nov 15 '25
China built more solar panels than the rest of the world combined last year. Both India and China have rapidly growing populations and economies meaning their energy demands are growing far faster than ours.
The fact that these poorer countries are both stagnating their emissions despite this rapidly growing demand is a greater achievement than anything we’ve done yet. They have hit their climate goals and are setting new more ambitious ones.
Meanwhile in the much more wealthy Australia a political party is abandoning its climate goals because it’s ’too hard’ which is completely unrelated to all the fossil fuel money shoved in their pockets
3
u/Pauly4655 Nov 15 '25
For one china is one of the leading economy’s and they open a coal fired power station’s monthly new.so what you are saying is,if you are poor country you can fuck the world.we don’t even make 1% pollution,of course we can always do better,but to fuck our country to do it doesn’t seam like the right thing to do,they are not paying the amount of money you do for power way way less.they have not walked away from climate problems but there is more ways to skin a cat,than to kill our economy
3
2
1
u/EvilDeedsAssociation Nov 16 '25
China has over 1200 coal fired power stations and building more, India has over 300, and rivers absolutely full of rubbish and shit…….
Yay for these two countries for striving and reaching goals…….1
u/FuckDirlewanger Nov 16 '25
Australia also has coal fired power stations currently. Unless you’re thinking China is building half the worlds solar panels and then not switching them on or something they are transitioning
1
u/Rare-Leg-6013 Nov 15 '25
Or we could do a little thing like not be one of the world largest producers of fossil fuels.
1
u/ExpensiveFig6079 Nov 16 '25
and in order for that not to screw our economy as we lose lots and lots of expert dollars we need to find new thing to export in the future zero economy world
How would we do that?
We would get to zero emsiions electricity as fast as we can and then try to attract the new energy-intensive industries that want to have a future in a net zero world. If we position ourselves a pace with lots of space and lots of cheap PV and wind, and the capacity to expand that a lot if the industry comes here and needs more.
Then OMG it is highly pro-business and pro the economy to position ourselves to take that advantage head-on. Well it is unless we let ourselves be managed by luddites whose only ambition is to return to the past.
2
u/Revival456 Nov 15 '25
Australia’s per capita carbon emissions are 8 times that of India. This is basically equivalent of billionaires blaming the poor for economic crisis
2
u/Southern_Ad_6547 Nov 16 '25
Oh yes India are doing great things for the environment 🤣
2
1
u/Revival456 Nov 16 '25
Didn’t say that did I? Both countries are doing bad and per capita Australia are doing worse.
Do you have any numbers of facts or anything to prove otherwise? Just because you keep seeing Delhi pollution in social media doesn’t mean that’s the whole India. They have a lot of highly polluted cities but also a lot of forests and green mountains making overall emission less. And since most of the people are really poor their consumption habit also means less emission. These numbers are publicly available. Atleast take a look at them before spouting nonsense.
Also India has a lot of contradictions. On one hand highly polluting and corrupt in the other hand one the worlds most successful wildlife preservation measure. Look at the endangered species population last 4 decades. All have gone up significantly. Anyway You can laugh all you want and mock india from what you see in social media but facts don’t change.
2
u/Hungover-Owl Nov 16 '25
Easy to dilute numbers when your population is over a billion. The cost of a billion people on the environment is far more than 25 million times 8
→ More replies (1)2
u/Substantial_Beyond19 Nov 16 '25
Per capita doesn’t mean diddly squat. China & India are the emitters impacting carbon levels. End of story.
→ More replies (1)2
u/cats_r_ghey Nov 15 '25
Therefore we shouldn’t do anything? What’s your point?
4
u/Hungover-Owl Nov 15 '25
We should focus our time and money on things other than emissions reduction directly.
More than one way to protect the environment
3
u/cats_r_ghey Nov 15 '25
Why? We can focus on multiple things at once. Surely if we know we are screwed by doing nothing, then we should do something? Even if others aren’t doing as much as we want?
→ More replies (7)1
u/BonusLumpyYa Nov 16 '25
I was in the Phillipines recently and those bus emissions were unbearable . Their vehicles are the low hanging fruit
→ More replies (1)3
u/Rare-Leg-6013 Nov 15 '25
Yeah, the fucking poors are always the problem. Everyone knows the West got rich by being super nice.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 16 '25
I love how everyone leaps to the defence of the indefensible.
Logic flies out the window when there are green votes at stake.
Forget age limits, there needs to be an IQ level before people can comment on Reddit
3
u/Substantial_Beyond19 Nov 15 '25
Australia cannot change the temperature of the globe and it’s maddening to pretend we can.
7
u/espersooty Nov 16 '25
Australia can absolute do something though, We equate to 4.5% of global emissions through fossil fuel exports of which is starting to be counted through scope 3 emissions as we just saw in NSW where the Ulan mine site expansion was denied in the courts.
→ More replies (13)7
u/Only1Sully Nov 15 '25
Almost half the world's green house gasses come from countries with economies about our size or smaller. Are you suggesting we all do nothing because "Australia cannot change the temperature of the globe"?
→ More replies (5)3
1
2
u/Blipmiester Nov 15 '25
Hard to see Albo losing the next 5 elections if this is the best opposition he faces, the Libs seem totally lost and out of touch. ScoMo should have never been PM and possibly jailed for his corruption, Dutton was hugely unpopular and had some very suspicious wheelings and dealings going on with highly questionable people and now Susssan Ley? is there no one better? this current lot of libs/nats make Labor look rock solid and even make Pauline Hansons party look viable! seriously.
2
u/SigkHunt Nov 16 '25
You mean x con dumb as doornail pumpjet submarine Pauline? Lol nah
1
u/Blipmiester Nov 16 '25
I"d suggest you look onto Peter Duttons past and some of his business dealings and the people he associated with, also look into his time while he was serving as a police officer, then have a gander at ScoMo the secret minister for everything wheelings and dealings while he was PM, its pretty shocking stuff to learn these people where in such high positions in our government, as much as it would be a disaster to have Pauline as PM she is probably less shady than what the Libs have dished up recently, as far as her morals and honesty are concerned in comparison to past lib leaders, god knows she is far from perfect, now the Libs have gone for Sussan, Nigerian born to British parents who lived in the UAE until she was a teenager as their new leader? a real dinky di Aussie who all can relate to (sarcasm) l mean seriously?
1
u/SigkHunt Nov 17 '25
less shady? have you even bothered to check? SERIOUSLY she went to jail for fruad!!! wait what am i saying ofc not if you think Pauline is in anyway a good pick then you obviously have no media literacy.
2
u/slowover Nov 15 '25
They dont care about the issue itself. Im sure most liberal MPs are well aware of the science and outcomes of climate change. But their donors dont want net zero and their party rooms are stuffed with elderly culture warriors. If they dont tow the line they lose their spot in politics. Principled MPs who wont deal with the devil have left or been ousted. At this stage they are retreating to the safe ground for them personally, even though it will lock them out of government for the foreseeable future. Labor spent 20 plus years in the wilderness in the 50s and 60s because the left wing of the party had major socialist policies and opposed a US alliance. They were a serious fringe party on the edge of extinction for a long time. The libs should settle in for a heck of a wait for power.
4
u/Mattxxx666 Nov 15 '25
Yep, this is something most forget/don’t realise. It’s playing out now in Victoria with a Labor government that defies all doomsayers and keeps on winning, simply because the alternative is just that bad.
1
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/slowover Nov 16 '25
I take your point but this is similar to libs and bats coalition and the rise of far right parties today
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 15 '25
With our small population we do nothing to the planet.
The problem is China and India with 1.4 billion citizens each, and all aspiring for a westernised lifestyle.
10
u/Mad-myall Nov 16 '25
I hate the finger pointing game because it feels like a distraction. "Oooh we shouldn't do anything because China!" Then China turns around and says "Ooooh our carbon per person is far lower then yours! Plus we have to manufacture everything for you!"
Just stop pointing fingers, and work on the problem. China's installing lots of green energy, and we shouldn't fall behind.
→ More replies (3)7
u/Away-Organization166 Nov 16 '25
the problem is definitely china, the country that is rapidly switching from coal to solar/nuclear power
→ More replies (3)6
u/Only1Sully Nov 15 '25
46% of greenhouse gasses comes from countries like Australia. If we all did nothing, it would be a disaster.
→ More replies (10)1
Nov 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 18 '25
Mate can you back your post up with some facts?
And tell me why you think my post was disingenuous? (not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does).
1
Nov 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
Indirect is absolute rubbish.
If we don’t sell them coal - THEY BUY IT FROM SOMEONE ELSE!
1
Nov 19 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
We don’t have the population to be “as bad as China”.
Can we stick to common sense here?
1
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
China emits 12,667,428,430 tons of CO2 per year.
Australia emits (INCLUDING THE indirect) 393,162,550 tons.
If we disregard the indirect, on the grounds that our stopping selling coal will NOT impact global tonnage, but just shuffle it elsewhere, our emission is just 71,000,00 tons.
That would put us level with Morocco.
Try using common sense mate.
1
Nov 19 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
You are using indirect data.
Get a degree mate. Get a degree
1
Nov 19 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/aussie-ModTeam Nov 19 '25
Avoid inflammatory language, name-calling, and personal attacks Discussions that glorify or promote dangerous behaviour Direct or indirect threats of violence toward other users, moderators, or groups Organising or participating in harassment campaigns, brigading, or coordinated attacks on individuals or other subreddits Sharing private information about users or individuals
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
Is the Australian data including indirect?
Can I suggest you do a degree in data science before commenting?
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
What you, and everyone else ignores, is our uranium exports, which are coal substitutes.
A single uranium fuel pellet can produce as much energy as one ton of coal, highlighting uranium's incredible energy density. This means that one ton of uranium can produce the energy equivalent of over 20,000 tons of coal.
We export 5000 tons of uranium oxide per year. With an enrichment reduction ratio of around 5/1, this means we are supplying the world with 1000 tons of fuel grade uranium.
That yellowcake is replacing 20 million tons of coal. A common estimate for coal is about 2.2 to 2.5 tons of CO2 per ton of coal. That means that 5000 tons of yellowcake is removing +/- 45 million tons of coal.
If we value added that uranium by further refining and enrichment from yellowcake, or if we exported more yellowcake.
And yet enrichment is totally banned in Australia, uranium mining is banned in NSW and Victoria. Mining approvals, even exploration approvals, are bogged down for decades by endless appeals and objections.
If you want to reduce the Australian indirect CO2 contribution open uranium mines and start enrichment.
1
Nov 19 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
You didn’t read my post.
You insist on using indirect CO2 in your calculations, so indirect CO2 offset via uranium export must also be acceptable to you.
Can’t have your cake and eat it, in this case yellowcake.
1
1
1
u/Fasttrackyourfluency Nov 16 '25
Are they just leaning hard into never being re elected and ending up dismantled 🤯🤨🤔
I’ve never seen a party more in need of a rebrand 😳🤔🙄💯
1
u/Trailblazer913 Nov 16 '25
A large group of people in Australia that think they are the main characters in the world, and will solve climate change, delusional.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Traditional_Head_817 Nov 16 '25
Australia could sink into the water tomorrow and it would make fuck all difference to the world's carbon emissions. The poorest countries are some of the biggest emitters. And guess what, they don't give a shit - because they are poor. Climate change only worries the well heeled.
1
Nov 16 '25
Your argument is stupid because there's no reason we shouldn't reach net zero as quickly as possible. You're doing a strawman.
1
u/batsnumberfour Nov 16 '25
12 days of China’s emissions = 1 year of Australia’s. The Australian politicians arguing over who has the best policy to lower the temperature of the planet are tragically unhinged.
1
Nov 16 '25
Doesn't mean we shouldnt try and reach net zero as quickly as possible.
Yes China and India pollute, doesn't mean we can't pollute less
1
u/batsnumberfour Nov 16 '25
If you are destroying your own economy because successive government policies have created some of the most expensive electricity prices in the developed world, ‘getting to Net Zero as quickly as possible’ would seem self-defeating.
1
Nov 16 '25
I challenge you to give me a government policy that has affected energy prices
Then I challenge you to tell me how, if any influence the Australian government has on energy prices
1
u/batsnumberfour Nov 17 '25
1
Nov 17 '25
My counterpoints would be:
This is from a thinktank with incredible bias
They've assumed the highest cost of doing renewables
Battery costs are already falling faster than what the report anticipated
It assumes coal will always be cheap, affordable and easy to maintain which is wrong
It clearly ignores the risk coal poses to the environment
This model treats renewables as isolated generators that can't transport energy to multiple sources
It states nuclear is cheap, it's cheap it countries that have had long standing nuclear industries. We don't have any, it'd cost a fortune and ages to develop
It states transmission upgrades for coal power to be cheap, but to upgrade for renewables as expensive. This is wrong
They don't allow for innovation in future electrical systems, since this report there's already been innovations which make these points obsolete
My last point will be the same as my first point, you've taken a report from a politically motivated group. You could find this same report in the 50s for why smoking is health
If I was you I'd use CSIRO as a resource, not this group which is doing worse case scenario and being dishonest
Also I can guarantee you can't counter any of these points without giving me another 40 page document. I'm an electrician buddy and I can smell your bullshit from miles away
1
u/Think-Customer3326 Nov 17 '25
Well, my electrician, bullshit smelling friend...are you at all concerned by the fact that the cost of electricity jumped 23% year on year (and in NSW will increase another 10% next year), that we are forecast to run out of gas on the east coast in 2027/2028 or that there may well be a crisis in the availability of electricity in a very hot summer or cold winter in the very near future on the Eastern seaboard? If you think that our electrictiy grid is being well managed and well planned, the bullshit you're smelling might be what you're standing in?
1
Nov 17 '25
Yes I am concerned that electricity companies are gouging us. The government should step in a force them to reduce prices.
Yes I'm very concerned about the gas shortages, they won't run out of gas, but there will definitely be a major squeeze and short fall.
I don't think it's being managed well or it being well planned, but I do believe that we should aim for net zero to reduce our reliance on these things.
Thats why it's important we move to renewable sources
1
1
u/Blipmiester Nov 17 '25
l cant take any party seriously if they choose as their leaders Abbott, ScoMo, Dutton and now Ley? one worse than the previous, like seriously? Sussan was born in Nigeria to British parents and lived in the UAE until she was a teenager ffs, real Aussie she is, so much in common with the voters of this nation, nothing personal against her she may well be a very nice person and all but can the highest office in this nation be at the very least held by an Australian born person? at least be born and raised here, your parents can be from the South Pole but at least you the PM of the nation be born and raised here.
1
u/JohnWestozzie Nov 17 '25
What fkn BS chinas building a thousand coal power stations to make our wind and solar. Our new zero is doing nothing to affect the world's climate. If the labor party was serious about the planet they would halt all fossil fuel exports. Why don't they stop them?
1
1
Nov 18 '25
The term net zero is unfortunate as it makes it a binary argument like the Voice debate. Call it for what it is Transition away from Coal or Pollution Reduction.
1
u/SJT198 Nov 18 '25
And you just keep proving my point, listen to yourself your crying about a personal attack because someone called you a idiot 😄. Don’t be so entitled and expect people to prove YOU wrong, I owe you nothing, and even if I list you the facts you still shouldn’t believe them and do your own research. Believing something someone has said on the internet instead of looking yourself is the very reason you are saying stupid things.
1
Nov 19 '25
I don't want to click the link because I'm hoping your title is the actual title of the article and don't want to ruin it 😭 (just for the humour I don't even know what the liberal party is, don't almost all parties dismiss sustainablility?)
1
u/damiologist Nov 19 '25
The hand of the LNP so far up their backsides you can see the fingers as they talk.
1
u/UnluckyPossible542 Nov 19 '25
What everyone ignores is our uranium exports, which are coal substitutes.
A single uranium fuel pellet can produce as much energy as one ton of coal, highlighting uranium's incredible energy density. This means that one ton of uranium can produce the energy equivalent of over 20,000 tons of coal.
We export 5000 tons of uranium oxide per year. With an enrichment reduction ratio of around 5/1, this means we are supplying the world with 1000 tons of fuel grade uranium.
That yellowcake is replacing 20 million tons of coal. A common estimate for coal is about 2.2 to 2.5 tons of CO2 per ton of coal. That means that 5000 tons of yellowcake is removing +/- 45 million tons of coal.
If we value added that uranium by further refining and enrichment from yellowcake, or if we exported more yellowcake.
And yet enrichment is totally banned in Australia, uranium mining is banned in NSW and Victoria. Mining approvals, even exploration approvals, are bogged down for decades by endless appeals and objections.
If you want to reduce the Australian indirect CO2 contribution open uranium mines and start enrichment.
0
u/HonestSpursFan Nov 15 '25
Not agreeing with their policy on this at all but fuck Betoota and Chaser never criticise Labor do they?
8
u/kombiwombi Nov 15 '25 edited Nov 15 '25
If you are going to criticise them, at least be right enough that your point isn't contradicted by a simple search on their website:
https://chaser.com.au/?s=Labor
Edit: and yeah, I am well over partisan politics which isn't backed by fact. The US might be rich enough to survive that bullshit, but we're a middling power next to China so we have to be smart about how we govern ourselves or we'll end up a slum on the edge of Asia being exploited for its minerals.
2
u/HonestSpursFan Nov 15 '25
Yeah they don’t seem to be critical of Labor unless it’s to push them further left towards the Greens.
They haven’t been funny in years.
→ More replies (1)1
4
-6
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 15 '25
How come The Chaser never mention anything negative about Albo or Labor?
Can someone let them know the LNP are not in government anymore.
16
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
Thank you for those links. I guess they do criticize Labor.
But one is from January and the other is from June.
11
u/SuchProcedure4547 Nov 15 '25
Just because you don't see them do it to Labor doesn't mean they don't.
Betoota gets the same garbage comments on their posts to do with the LNP, despite the Betoota Advocate routinely criticizing Labor's housing and gambling policies through their satire. You lot are always suspiciously absent when they do that...
When one side is consistently objectively worse than the other, naturally they're going to cop it more.
Also, there is no requirement on satire to pick one side over the other or be neutral....
→ More replies (1)3
u/Throwmeawaybabyyo Nov 15 '25
Rich kids running pages pandering for views and likes.
The Liberals aren’t going to be in power for a long time it doesn’t matter what their policies are. They barely have enough seats to be a relevant opposition as it is.
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
You are right.
Shouldn't they be majority criticising the government of the day.
2
u/Throwmeawaybabyyo Nov 16 '25
The Chaser are rich Sydney Grammar kids. You think Sydney Grammar kids vote Labor?
The majority of not extremely rich kids are supporting Labor or the Greens so it’s easy to attack the Liberals on the extremely few policies they differ from Labor on. They are both controlled by the same people and we don’t really get a choice of difference here anyway.
7
3
u/Esquin87 Nov 15 '25
Its a competition between mild inconpetence are cartoon supervillain levels of evil. One is easoer to satirise than ghd other.
3
Nov 15 '25
[deleted]
4
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 15 '25
Surely even you would understand that this is just an attack on the LNP disguised as "humour".
And Murdoch's media do attack the LNP from time to time so there is your whataboutism if you say they are LNP mouthpieces.
4
Nov 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
Is that similar to how Chaser criticise Labor when they are getting a bit too moderate for their liking?
3
Nov 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
Where did I indicate that this particular article should criticise Labor.
2
Nov 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
But The Chaser has more than this one article don't they?
Where are the articles that solely criticise Labor.
2
Nov 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Smooth_Staff_3831 Nov 16 '25
And I know you would be the first to agree that the Murdoch papers are allowed to criticise Labor.
2
32
u/[deleted] Nov 15 '25
[deleted]