Yet another new role for Government

Who knew.  A Labor Party member from South Australia who is a lawyer by training, spent his entire “professional” career as either a union official or a member of parliament believes, within any specific or detailed information, whether a private project in NSW is “economic”.  Fascinating.

In the SMH:

The gas that matters most to this question is near Narrabri in northern NSW, where Santos estimates it can produce gas at $6.40 a gigajoule – a price Butler believes is too high to solve Australia’s energy challenges. (Mark) Butler criticises the project on economics more than emissions.

Very impressive that someone who knows nothing about economics can make such a call.  But this is Politics Oz Style.

But boy this Butler chap is talented:

Butler believes domestic gas will be too expensive to justify more power stations at a time when solar, wind and battery storage are getting cheaper.

Butler is so talented that he knows more than the people who are putting their own money and reputation on the line.  Impressive.  Maybe a job at the United Nation or the European Union beckons.

Yep.  We are stuffed. We are so, so stuffed.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Yet another new role for Government

  1. RobertS

    About Butler from Wiki:

    “Butler was active in student politics while at university and became friends with future South Australian Labor Party leaders including Penny Wong and Jay Weatherill.[4]”.

    Birds of a feather.

    All f..kwits.

  2. Pyrmonter

    Oh, and as he isn’t shy of reminding people, a fine example of that Adelaide phenomenon ‘Bluebloods for Communism’ – he’s the grandson and great-grandson of two knighted non-Labor Premiers of the late 19C/early 20C.

    Both Butlers were of the ‘progressive liberal’ sort of non-Labor politician – proponents of state intervention in the economy to ‘promote’ growth etc, though neither so much so as the second’s immediate successor, Tom Playford.

  3. Robbo

    Solar, wind and battery power are getting cheaper. Really? Take away the gigantic taxpayer subsidies from those three and then let’s see the real price. Cheaper? That bloke Butler is a fuckwit and should be put into an institution for the care of ratbag loony lefties. My vomit has more intelligence than him.

  4. Bronson

    Cockheads like him are what have sunk the Labor party as a party of the wurkers. Protected, privileged and pompous but the reality is vacuous, venal and vapid.

  5. Boxcar

    Pakula fits into exactly the same box.
    Public schoolboy who’s never had a job in his life.
    Politics is now full of the equivalent of trainspotters

  6. miltonf

    No STEM knowledge, just another lawyer. As our arty farty-legal elite know, technical skill is for yukkie rude mechanics.

  7. miltonf

    Was Pakula the one who told Landcruiser buyers to ‘get a life’?

  8. If the gas power station was profitable without subsidies then it would have been built already.

    It is hilarious that you are trying an argument from authority when the authorities (the private gas operators) already concluded you are wrong.

  9. Snoopy

    m0nty
    #3589202, posted on September 18, 2020 at 10:52 am
    If the gas power station was profitable without subsidies then it would have been built already.

    This deserves further investigation. Lets get rid of all subsidies and non-financial barriers and see where the chips fall.

  10. Boambee John

    m0nty
    #3589202, posted on September 18, 2020 at 10:52 am
    If the gas power station was profitable without subsidies then it would have been built already.

    Would solar, wind and batteries ever have been built as grid power sources without subsidies?

    Still, Butler claims that “solar, wind and battery storage are getting cheaper.”

    Would he (and you) therefore support ending all subsidies to them? Thought not!

  11. W Hogg

    I suspect that wind and solar WILL eventually be cheaper. On that basis, one wonders why our grandparents ever built electricity infrastructure at all. They should have simply waited until mainstream Unreliables in 2060.

  12. This deserves further investigation. Lets get rid of all subsidies and non-financial barriers and see where the chips fall.

    Fine by me! No fuel tax credits, no tax breaks for fossil exploration, no R&D incentives to pour money into carbon capture, no accelerated depreciation on diggers, no tax deals with states.

    You’d never see a coal mine commissioned again. Mind you, not sure there ever would be anyway.

  13. Boambee John

    m0nty

    We all realise that you live in a fantasy world, not only of football, but also politics and economics. But perhaps you could make an attempt to add up how much Adani has spent so far to get its new Queensland mine, and compare it to fuel tax credits, and tax breaks for fossil exploration, and tell us how much they are currently ahead.

    Why does the fascist left hate the idea of brown people having access to electricity? Are they (including you) all racist?

    PS, what do you think of Dan of the Dead abolishing Habeas Corpus in Victoria? Is it acceptable if it makes you feel safer in your basement?

  14. Tim Neilson

    Fine by me! No fuel tax credits

    Poor old mental defective.
    M0nty, if you’d ever had a real job, you would have experienced the phenomenon of having tax withheld from your wages through the year, then lodging a tax return and getting a tax refund. That’s what “fuel tax credits” are. They aren’t a subsidy.
    And they’re available to any user of off-road diesel. That includes wind and solar farms’ use of diesel in construction, maintenance and decommissioning, or any other use they have for diesel.

    , no tax breaks for fossil exploration,
    What “tax breaks”? The fact that expenses of exploration are deductible? Do you object to wind and solar farms getting tax deductions for business expenses?

    no R&D incentives to pour money into carbon capture,
    What about R&D incentives for wind, solar etc.? Would they go too?

    no accelerated depreciation on diggers,
    How does accelerated depreciation apply to wind and solar assets?

    no tax deals with states.
    What deals are you talking about here m0nty?

    Poor old m0nty. Too stupid to understand the concept of comparative advantage.

  15. chrism

    I phoned in to your ABC 774 when the Lbor representative on energy was debating Bridget Mackenzie and asked why not nuclear here, after all we export tonnes of uranium which are used in the same biosphere for energy production : why not have Australian workers construct, operate and maintain nuclear power here :: the Labor pollie offered from his extensive knowledge “no-one is constructing nuclear anymore” , I begged to differ saying China and others were constructing many – but was cancelled by the show producer, de-platformed for contradicting their man

  16. H B Bear

    If the gas power station was profitable without subsidies then it would have been built already.

    mUnty, perhaps you would like to give us a guest post on regulatory risk and its impact on WACC and project evaluation.

  17. H B Bear

    MarkButler makes you nostalgic for quality Liar Ministers like Stephen Conroy.

  18. Squirrel

    Butler is a great asset for the LNP – his climate policies are a two-fingered salute to the people whose votes Labor needs in order to get elected federally.

  19. H B Bear

    Squirrel – he’s not Robinson Crusoe there. It includes practically the entire front bench. That’s how a plodder like Slo Mo and his fellow Lieborals get elected.

  20. John A

    Robbo #3589100, posted on September 18, 2020, at 9:36 am

    …That bloke Butler is a fuckwit and should be put into an institution for the care of ratbag loony lefties.

    Stop feeding them suggestions. Their ideas should simply wither in the vine and flap in the breeze.

Comments are closed.