A cancerous fantasy: Australian Outlook 2019

Two years in the making and with a release planned for shortly after a triumphant Shorten Government occupied the Treasury Benches, we now have the Australian Outlook 2019.

A team led by Dr Ken Henry, the man who developed Australia’s disastrous response to the 2007 world economic crisis, has produced a glossy with some smashing pics and charts with wonderful curly lines.  The report tells us we have to confront challenges: the Rise of Asia, Technological change, Climate change and environment, Demographics, Trust, Social cohesion.

The Guardian and the AFR waxed lyrical about the blueprint, which is to shape the economy for the Brave New World. We were breathlessly told the nation is once again ‘at the crossroads’, that the report is a “call to arms” and we would, “Drift towards a future of slow decline economically and socially” unless we act now to ‘create a future of greater prosperity for all, globally competitive industries and a sustainable environment’.  Ah, the sustainable rub!

The AFR approvingly quoted the report as saying, ‘The world is changing, and Australia will need to adapt much more rapidly than in the past if it is to keep up.’ The report pointed to a need to focus on:

  • Technology, (without which the CSIRO as prime financier would not have a guernsey), and better education, quality jobs, and better cities
  • Following these bromides, there is the real agenda: ‘reliable, affordable low emissions’ (near zero within 40 years). This is amplified by a call for a land shift for sustainable food fibre and fuel production with, of course, carbon sequestration
  • And the ‘clarion call’ finishes with the anodyne appeal for more ‘curiosity, collaboration and solutions’; clothed in a “shift in culture”, this involves a rebuild of trust in politics, business and social institutions.

As with the multitude of previous blueprints for the future, the Australian Outlook 2019 is a means of pointing out that the market based economy is flawed and needs the guidance and wisdom of those gathered together to ensure it is fit for the future purpose. ‘Strong leadership and bold action’ is the ticket.

The modern elixir and the rationale for assembling the team is a need to transform the energy economy.  We are told once again that we can have, indeed need to progress towards, a carbon free energy system.  This, we are informed, will both be more sustainable and cheaper than those archaic coal generators, some of which refuse to die even when faced with competition from wind that receives a subsidy greater than the market price.

The transition to renewables is said to be inevitable ‘due to continuing reductions in the cost of renewable electricity generation technologies’, but if we can accelerate this, we will enjoy higher growth. Instead of a little over $100,000 per capita by 2060, we will average close to $140,000.

Energy modelling proving that renewables, if given a push, would cleanse the atmosphere and lower energy costs is hardly new.

Back in 2013 and 2014, when electricity prices had not yet succumbed to the destruction meted out by accumulating levels of subsidised renewables, electricity prices were only 40 per cent of those prevailing today.  Since 2003, the subsidy for the main renewable scheme covering wind and large sale solar averaged about $60 per MWh. The spot price for electricity is now $100 per MWh but three years ago, prior to the renewables subsidies destroying the market it was under $40.

Yet modelling, most of it commissioned by the subsidy-seekers and their green cohorts, told us that the prices would be lower if we injected subsidised renewables into the mix.

In a 2014 report to the Clean Energy Council, ROAM, forecasted the following price increases in the absence of renewable energy subsidies.

Similarly, SKM in its 2013 report, Estimating the Impact of the RET on Retail Prices, saw price reductions of between 5 and 20 per cent for 2019 as a result of the renewable subsidies.

Energy consultancies followed the money and no firm’s modelling predicted the doubling of prices that were experienced a result of on-going renewable subsidies.

Economic interventionists and other socialists never learn from the past.  The planning of their predecessors was always flawed in some way and each newcomer claims that this time they will get it right. Such logic is especially compelling when there’s a sackful of money financing it.

In the Australian Outlook 2019 report the CSIRO is joined by green left subsidy claimants in a fantasy creation, which if followed would prove grossly damaging to the future economy.  If nothing else, however, the report offers a useful indication of the location within the CSIRO of a cancerous waste in government spending which, if cut out, would bring benefits far in excess of the pure savings in taxes spent.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to A cancerous fantasy: Australian Outlook 2019

  1. stackja

    Leftists fantasy!
    What could possibly be go wrong?

  2. Beachcomber

    It’s dressed up in klimate catastrophism and ‘technological change’ but it’s an obvious 5 year (20 year?) plan for total state command and control of the economy. A wet dream for the fascist left establishment.

  3. mareeS

    Can we not just get on with things? These “experts” are worse than my cat meowing for breakfast.

  4. Howard Hill

    May I suggest we all invest in a few of zero emission tools that were invented over 4000 years ago, if you haven’t already got them lying around. One is used for sharpening the other and the the third is used for binding or hanging things. They are of course a file, a pitch fork and some lanyard, the latter tied in the form of a noose.

  5. Dr Fred Lenin

    Wih a litle tuition any five year old can daw graphs which would ave as much veracity as these,to base any projections on stupid unreliable energy and gaia worsipping nonsense is crap.
    If 100 windmilks produce no power in calm conditions will 100,000,000nwindmills produce any more ?
    If 50 million solar panels produce no power on dull days and at night will 500 million produce more ?
    When do we need most power ,at night ,? right ?
    Its unbelieveable how stupid the intelligentsia are ,or is it ?

  6. Karabar

    At what point will it occur to the luvvies that:
    a) “Global warming” is a steady gradual trend toward lower temperatures for the past 9 millennia.
    b) “Climate” is the property of a REGION expressed as a classification, and no region has experience a significant change in classification for the past century or two.
    c) “Sea level rise” has been an insignificant steady 3 mm p.a. for about a thousand years.
    d) Humanity cannot influence the balance in CO2 in the air with that in the sea which is established by Hook’s Law.
    e) We are fortunate that an unusually active sun in the 80’s and 90″ and its effect on the aqueous 70% of the surface resulted in a beneficial increase in atmospheric CO2.
    f) The gains in food production over the past 50 years will be difficult to maintain in cooler temperatures if atmospheric CO2 is diminished.
    g) The entire CAGW scam is the worst swindle foisted on the population ever.

  7. Herodotus

    Aw! But, but, it got a glowing paean of praise on the ABC’s AM program this morning.
    Just as well their ratings are so ratshit or voters might be influenced to believe that sort of rubbish.

  8. nb

    Twilight zone economics, leading to the darkest of nights.

  9. Percy Popinjay

    2019 Australian National Outlook, brought to the masses by their beloved CSIRO.

    So that’s the source of the garbage I posted on this morning’s open thread. Who’da thunk it?

    Anyway, gotta zip, off to plant thousands of trees.

  10. cohenite

    People who assert renewables are cheaper should be publically flogged. There is no levelized cost basis to compare renewables because renewables only work 20-30% of the time, are totally unpredictable, require back-up, require their electricity output of DC to be converted to AC for the grid and so on. In short they do not work; no modern grid can run on renewables.

  11. Mark M

    The CSIRO has a history of predictions for Australia.

    How did they go?

    Here is two:

    May, 1993: “The report, The Regional Impact of the Enhanced Greenhouse Effect on Victoria, was based on studies by CSIRO atmospheric researchers into the effects of a predicted doubling of greenhouse gases by the years 2030 to 2050.

    Victoria’s coasts would be vulnerable not only to the estimated 30cm rise in sea-level predicted by 2030, Dr Pittock said, but to increased coastal erosion and flooding due to storm surges and big waves.

    Patterns would be much clearer by the year 2020.”

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/126986125

    July, 2008: Petrol ‘could cost $8 a litre by 2018’

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/petrol-could-cost-8-a-litre-by-2018-20080711-3dc1.html

  12. Bazinga

    WA is bigger than SA and Tas, why no charts? I’m guessing but are they afraid of what it would reveal about the state that still loves coal?

  13. Mark M

    In 1988, CSIRIO’s Top Scientist Predicted 2-4 C Warming By 2018

    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/csirios-top-scientist-predicted-2-4-c-warming-by-2018/

    If it was a race horse, the glue factory would be the next stop.

  14. Charles

    There are more motherhood statements in this report than I’ve seen for a while, and unfortunately I already get to see government reports more often than is healthy for me.

  15. Karabar

    Penny Sackett was Australia’s Chief “scientist” from 2008 to 2011.
    Why an astrophysicist feels obliged to make predictions about the weather I will never understand, but in 2009 she declared that there were only five years left to save the planet.
    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/12/only-three-days-left-to-save-the-earth/
    For this sort of nonsense the taxpayer doles out millions to the rent seekers.

  16. Percy Popinjay

    July, 2008: Petrol ‘could cost $8 a litre by 2018’

    If those noxious totalitarian idiots had their way, it would be.

  17. Squirrel

    “The modern elixir and the rationale for assembling gthe team is a need to transform the energy economy. ”

    I’m really looking forward to details of the CSIRO-designed battery which will store renewably-generated electricity on a mass scale, be produced without environmentally-harmful mining of the requisite minerals, and be fully manufacted in Australia, for export worldwide, with the massive earnings thus replacing the vital export income we currently gain from all those soon-to-be-stranded-asset mineral exports that currently do so much to pay our way in the world……..

  18. RobK

    Thanks for your post Alan. Are you able to determine if the costings of electricity brought by renewables includes the lost royalties paid by coal burners to the various states?(i.e. the cost of sterilised resources. i hope that makes sense, ive had a long day)

  19. egg_

    CSIREN – Australia’s Chief Alarmists

  20. Robk

    No I cannot do the costings comprehensively. The royalties are mainly fraudulent taxes anyway, esp.in Vic where they are levied on what is a superabundant supply of dirt and are therefore a tax on an input.

    I estimated the aggregate costs of renewable subsidies for 2016 e.g see here
    https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/b6987c_ca653c62aeb14f2bb027bc42737ea58c.pdf p 20

    The excreable Simon Holmes a Court contested the numbers but did not offer alternatikves

  21. RobK

    Bazinga,
    WA is bigger than SA and Tas, why no charts? I’m guessing but are they afraid of what it would reveal about the state that still loves coal?
    Unfortunately WA has turned it’s back on any new coal development in the SW and mid-west. Existing mines are on their last legs.

  22. cohenite

    Alan Moran

    #3045976, posted on June 18, 2019 at 7:07 pm

    These are direct subsidies, the indirect effect is vastly greater.

    In 2009 the then NSW Labour government commissioned Frontier Modelling to analyse the effect the 5% ETS proposed by the then Rudd government would have on the Australian GDP. The modelling showed a $2 trillion reduction in the Australian economy directly linked to the effect of the ETS by 2050; that’s $50 billion per annum.

    The link is a bit dated and some of the internal links in the article by David Stockwell have disappeared but the point holds.

  23. RobK

    Thanks Alan,
    Your Finkel response was a good one.

  24. Hadyn

    I suppose if someone asked me for directions to the future, I’d be like the Irishman who wouldn’t be starting from here.

    Every generation deals with whatever comes along. If one has guiding principles that have demonstrably worked over centuries, then, hopefully, by sticking to them the right decisions will be made at the right times.

    Things like freedom of speech, property and association, democracy, rule of law, equality before the law, equality of all people irrespective of race, sex or religion.

    They are the important things we need to get right. If we can do that then the future will look after itself.

  25. brett woodman

    Karabar
    #3045785, posted on June 18, 2019 at 1:43 pm
    At what point will it occur to the luvvies that:
    a) “Global warming” is a steady gradual trend toward lower temperatures for the past 9 millennia.
    b) “Climate” is the property of a REGION expressed as a classification, and no region has experience a significant change in classification for the past century or two.
    c) “Sea level rise” has been an insignificant steady 3 mm p.a. for about a thousand years.
    d) Humanity cannot influence the balance in CO2 in the air with that in the sea which is established by Hook’s Law.
    e) We are fortunate that an unusually active sun in the 80’s and 90″ and its effect on the aqueous 70% of the surface resulted in a beneficial increase in atmospheric CO2.
    f) The gains in food production over the past 50 years will be difficult to maintain in cooler temperatures if atmospheric CO2 is diminished.
    g) The entire CAGW scam is the worst swindle foisted on the population ever.

    ******* I have to agree with Karabar 100 %.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.