Australian Youth Climate Coalition

The hard left movement – AYCC – claims 84 630 young people as members, although this is based on people signing up for email alerts and presumably includes quite a number of people who do not support the movement and, indeed, may be old (yes, people do lie about their age).

Now the group wants to support a call for two coal-fired power stations in Port Augusta to be replaced by six solar power stations. Apparently the 4000 residents of Port Augusta want a nice and expensive solar plant, provided someone else pays of course. The option of renewing the coal-fired stations, or replacing them with gas is considered too terrible to contemplate.

To demonstrate the AYCC’s commitment, they will be walking from Port Augusta to Adelaide.

As the promo states:

It’s not pie in the sky. Solar thermal plants are already operating efficiently in the United States and Europe. And we can build one here.

The community, council, local business and even the power station company are all on board. But to make it happen we need the Federal Government to help fund it. We need to make Port Augusta a national issue.

This September, over 100 people will walk from Port Augusta to Adelaide’s Parliament House – a distance of 325 kilometres.

Isn’t there a disconnect here?

  • if solar thermal plants are ‘operating efficiently’ then Government support is unnecessary.
  • why are they walking to Adelaide’s Parliament House when they are asking for Federal Government support? Surely they should be walking from Port Augusta to Parliament House Canberra – a  distance of 1338 km. Or is this just an example of laziness?
  • as Tim Blair notes, the 100 walkers could be taken to Adelaide by bus for around $2600, but they want $20 000 to walk the distance.

AYCC – grow up.

UPDATE

Sdog has made a good point about Decarbonise SA – an attempt to abolish carbon. We will have to get Tom Lehrer to redo his song. For the past several thousand years, humans have been discovering new elements and ultimately cataloging them (such as in the periodic table invented by Dmitri Mendeleev). Now, for the first time in human history, scientists are trying to abolish an element.

There’s antimony, arsenic, aluminum, selenium,
And hydrogen and oxygen and nitrogen and rhenium,
And nickel, neodymium, neptunium, germanium,
And iron, americium, ruthenium, uranium,
Europium, zirconium, lutetium, vanadium,
And lanthanum and osmium and astatine and radium,
And gold and protactinium and indium and gallium, (gasp)
And iodine and thorium and thulium and thallium.

There’s yttrium, ytterbium, actinium, rubidium,
And boron, gadolinium, niobium, iridium,
And strontium and silicon and silver and samarium,
And bismuth, bromine, lithium, beryllium, and barium.

There’s holmium and helium and hafnium and erbium,
And phosphorus and francium and fluorine and terbium,
And manganese and mercury, molybdenum, magnesium,
Dysprosium and scandium and cerium and cesium.
And lead, praseodymium and platinum, plutonium,
Palladium, promethium, potassium, polonium,
And tantalum, technetium, titanium, tellurium, (gasp)
And cadmium and calcium and chromium and curium.

There’s sulfur, californium and fermium, berkelium,
And also mendelevium, einsteinium, nobelium,
And argon, krypton, neon, radon, xenon, zinc and rhodium,
And chlorine, carbon, cobalt, copper, tungsten, tin and sodium.

These are the only ones of which the news has come to Harvard,
And there may be many others but they haven’t been discovered.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Australian Youth Climate Coalition

  1. if solar thermal plants are ‘operating efficiently’ then Government support is unnecessary.

    Efficienct and economical are 2 different things. The start of the art any technology is the most efficient at its given purpose but very rarely economical to begin with.

  2. Tom

    Because we’ve had two decades of growth virtually uninterrupted by serious recession, a new generation has grown up utterly unable to comprehend that government money comes out of working people’s pockets. Instead, it’s a magically endless supply of happiness that comes from somewhere else and anyone that opposing using all these sparkly dollars is just a spoilsport. Labor has racked up a previously non-existent interest bill of $1500 per annum per Australian household on top of a tax/spending bill of $376 billion p.a. or $35,000 p.a. plus per household — up 71% (from $219b) in the past five years. Solar energy is a fabulous idea, but not if it requires potentially crippling subsidies and not if it replaces an existing, perfectly safe cheap energy system on the say-so of an unproven theory about CO2 that is uncorroborated by real-world observational evidence.

  3. Driftforge

    The guys at Decarbonise SA are pushing a better concept – replacing them with nuclear power.

  4. “The guys at Decarbonise SA…”

    Decarbonise SA?

    Decarbonise?

    They want to, what, ban an element?

  5. “War on the Periodic Table!”

  6. Ivan Denisovich

    They want to, what, ban an element?

    Why not?! It’s been done:

    “The last straw was when Greenpeace decided to run with a global ban on chlorine. “This is when Greenpeace really lost me. As a student of advanced biochemistry, I realized chlorine was one of the 92 natural elements in the periodic table and that it is essential for life. You don’t just go around banning entire elements…”

    http://joannenova.com.au/2011/04/greenpeace-founders-fight-it-out/

    “War on the Periodic Table!”

    Two down, ninety to go.

  7. michael

    Kelly sums it up nicely in the first comment above.

    It is fucking frightening that not one of these idiots have a grip on where government money comes from – the story is just, we think its a good idea, therefore someone else must pay for it. This is Australias future – the product of many decades of socialist conditioning.

  8. It’s not pie in the sky. Solar thermal plants are already operating efficiently in the United States and Europe. And we can build one here.

    Yes, you can – but if local raw sunlight hours per day and cloud cover patterns don’t match, you will almost certainly wind up with an expensive albino pachyderm on your hands. Geothermal power is a demonstrated winner as well, as our Kiwi cousins have long known; but if your geological conditions aren’t optimal, you could be pushing shit uphill – as Tim Flannery’s pet project has already found out.

    Decisions on these kinds of things need to be made by (or with the strong advocacy of) engineers who are avid fans of the technology while still being aware of its limitations. I’m all for reducing reliance on fossil fuels, particularly for electricity generation, but the Australian government and the Green movement are specifying an artificially restricted technology base and mismatching technology to operating environments. They’re artists and dreamers rather than technocrats and businesspeople, and it shows.

  9. Blogstrop

    Artists and dreamers rather than technocrats and businesspeople

    And they are dominating the media. They also recruit impressionable students, who the media then cover sympathetically. They appear like carbon Cate in propaganda. They make up the membership of lobby groups who the media also cover sympathetically. Perhaps they go on to join political parties like Labor or, more likely, the Greens. Then they cause even more trouble.

  10. Driftforge

    Two things on Decarbonse SA.

    1. What they are actually trying to do is unban #92, resulting in less #12 being compounded.

    2. Any environmentalist who is able to get past the paranoia over nuclear energy is one who is able to be reasoned with.

    I’ll take support for nuclear power where I can find it; if the outcome of this global warming scare is nuclear power around the country, that’s a pretty solid silver lining.

  11. Dangph

    They want to, what, ban an element?

    And not just any element, but carbon, the most important element for life on earth. All living things are made out of carbon.

    If they wanted to ban, say, rubidium, then fine. Who gives a shit about rubidium.

  12. Agree with you, Driftforge. I’m happy to talk to anyone who wants to discuss where viable hydro and safe nuclear can be put, and THEN talk about all the other forms of non-fossil power & how to make them mechanistically and economically viable on a large scale.

  13. Who gives a shit about rubidium.

    Probably those who make money refining it. From memory, it is recovered from molybdenum ore process waste.

  14. Dangph

    Probably those who make money refining it. From memory, it is recovered from molybdenum ore process waste.

    Oh, so you are defending capitalist miners who are raping mother earth? They will be the first against the wall, and thence the compost heap, come the glorious green revolution.

  15. sdog

    If the “decarbonise the world” movement gets its way, will Australians have to get their Organic Chemistry textbooks in plain brown wrapping from dodgy ACT postal box addresses?

    Or will Conroy and Finkelstein team up and ban the subject outright, “for the chiiiiildren!” ?

    Really, Drifty. Do you trust numpties who are apparently scientifically illiterate enough to claim to want to ban the building block of life itself, to have anything to do with nuclear power? Honestly I don’t think I’d trust anyone that proudly & willfully stupid about science to even change my smoke alarm battery.

  16. sdog

    Mo is over-rated, but. Let’s go ahead and ban Mo.

  17. Um. The ‘ban’ is something you made up sdog.

  18. I have no problem with coal mining, or even with burning it as an energy source.

    I do have a problem with nuclear power being ‘banned’ in Australia, and am quite willing to make use of someone else’s concern for the environment to see that change.

  19. sdog

    Driftforge the Decarboniser also believes that chlorofluorocarbon coolants in air conditioners must be replaced with 410a because, OXYGEN.

  20. sdog

    Look, you can’t demand that an entire State “decarbonise” itself without copping some righteous mocking from anyone who ever passed Year 7 chemistry. You just can’t.

  21. sdog

    Although I must say that living on a diet of fully decarbonised food will go some ways towards solving the Australian obesity crisis. So there’s that, anyway.

  22. Driftforge

    Sdog, we live in a nation that has deuranised itself, and you want to make that comparison? FFS.

  23. brc

    Efficienct and economical are 2 different things. The start of the art any technology is the most efficient at its given purpose but very rarely economical to begin with.

    This is not true. Efficient means using resources to their maximum extent. Anything that is efficient will automatically be economical. You can’t just build something that costs a trillion dollars and then call it efficient, ignoring the capital cost. The capital cost is part of the resources it uses.

    Overall efficiency has to include the contructions, running costs, and overall lifetime output. On all these fronts, solar thermal fails against coal + gas fired.

    Anything that is more efficient will be more economical to run.

    If only the gullible youth could work out that something has to be profitable to be built. The moment that solar thermal is profitable, they will be built. There are no regulatory barriers to building one of these plants.

  24. sdog

    Australia has no radioisotopes? Far out. What d’y’all use in your cancer centres, decarbonised emu oil and sand?

  25. Driftforge

    And that is a smaller stretch than “a diet of fully decarbonised food”

    You’re a plank short sdog.

    But hey, keep digging. It’s good for the amusement value.

  26. cohenite

    Great times; morons rule, be they young fuckwits like those of the flushed faces of the AYCC, or the rudy visage of that coal-smeared hypocrite Windsor.

  27. Myrrdin Seren

    What d’y’all use in your cancer centres, decarbonised emu oil and sand?

    sdog – would you be surprised to learn that the green-left types want to close our only isotope producing reactor too

    eg

    http://www.mapw.org.au/australian-issues/lucas-heights-reactor

    I am sure you will find other ‘progressive grass roots activists’ if you google a tad.

  28. Peter Senge, Professor Systems Thinker, runs something in the US called Camp Snowball intended to move youth to action around Climate Change and Sustainability.

    In general, I am seeing a great deal of push for youth action on Climate Change. It fits the Marxist theory of the mind. It is action and emotion not cognitive and analytical. It is authentic and real world and not abstract, conceptual thinking, It is consistent with the John Dewey emphasis that radiates all over the world more than ever 100 years later of using the schools to change the mindsets and values of the children so they will remake society around a collectivist vision.

    Some of the work I have done recently pulled up declarations on how to use the schools to community organize both the parents and students in urban schools. Deliberately keeping things atrocious to nurture the sense of grievance and belief that society and the economy must be changed.

    These youth are being trained to feel, not know.

  29. Rabz

    sdog – would you be surprised to learn that the green-left types want to close our only isotope producing reactor too

    I was about to make that point.

    Oh and what do you know – it’s still on their website:

    The Australian greenslime will:

    close the OPAL nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights.

  30. johanna

    They want to, what, ban an element?

    And not just any element, but carbon, the most important element for life on earth. All living things are made out of carbon.

    If they wanted to ban, say, rubidium, then fine. Who gives a shit about rubidium.
    ——————————-
    Hey, I care deeply about rubidium. Rubidium is, like, part of Gaia. So lay off, OK?

    Re AYCC – let’s not forget that it was the compost heap that nurtured Ms Anna Rose, now the spouse of Victorian novel fainter and former GetUp head, Simon Sheikh.

  31. Bill

    Is SS former head of Getup?? Good news, made my day.

  32. bert

    “If they wanted to ban, say, rubidium, then fine. Who gives a shit about rubidium.”

    …for some reason I am still laughing at this line, minutes after reading it. Blame it on Friday.

  33. I’m pretty sure that by “Decarbonise”, they mean “remove our reliance on fossil fuels”. If that’s the case, I’m fine with that. Rock on.

  34. sdog

    I’m pretty sure that by “Decarbonise”, they mean “remove our reliance on fossil fuels”.

    So next time Queensland floods, we need a “DEHYDROGENISE AUSTRALIA!!1111!!!” movement.

    Because fuck science, fuck the fact that words actually mean things, it just SOUNDS so awesome and noble. I mean water HAS hydrogen in it, amirite? And it sounds so SCIENCEY!

    But believe me – you no more want to live in A WORLD WITHOUT HYDROGEN!!!1111!!! than in a A WORLD WITHOUT CARBON!!1111!!!

    Australia needs fewer scientific illiterates at the moment and less public sympathy for them, not more.

  35. Cold-Hands

    Speaking of Anna Rose, I was extremely surprised that the Guardian-on-the-Yarra posted my review of her book Madlands without modification. Is this the beginning of the end of its support for CAGW?

  36. .

    The AYCC are a fascist organisation.

Comments are closed.