X Close

The hypocrisy of Australia’s Net Zero policy Rainforests are dying for the sake of renewable energy

A hazard-reduction burn in NSW (Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images)

A hazard-reduction burn in NSW (Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images)


August 29, 2023   5 mins

An unbroken canopy of ancient eucalypts rides over the ridges of the Atherton Tablelands and disappears into the horizon. Queensland’s wet, tropical ecosystem is like nowhere else on Earth, the sacred remnants of the ancient Gondwanan forest that covered Australia before it separated from Antarctica 100 million years ago. Chalumbin Forest survived the axes of Queensland’s early settlers with its ancient ecosystem virtually intact. Yet a brutal reckoning with modernity could be just months away.

“They’re going to put the windmills in there, aren’t they?” said Tommy, my Aboriginal guide, as we looked down at the forest from a secluded bluff. “They want to really rip this whole country up.” Looking out across the landscape, with an industrial wind turbine development just a ministerial tick away from final approval, it seems a bad joke — an indictment of the skewed judgement of Australian governments for whom the race against climate change trumps everything else. The pledge of Net Zero emissions by 2050 is driving a 21st-century gold rush, forcing renewable energy companies deep into the hinterland.

Ark Energy, a Korean-backed renewables corporation, plans to bulldoze 1,100 hectares of trees at Chalumbin, which is almost twice the size of Melbourne and on the edge of a world heritage area. Dynamite will be brought in to blast ancient rocks and hilltops will be flattened to accommodate platforms for the turbines and cranes. More than 100km of roads will be carved through the forest to facilitate hundreds of truck movements delivering thousands of tonnes of concrete, gravel and steel. Engineers will supervise the smoothing of gradients and rounding of curves to ease the passage of oversize vehicles more than 100 metres long and carrying giant turbine blades from Cairns Harbour.

Once completed, the 86 towers will rise 200 metres above the tree line, polluting the view for miles. The federal government can ill-afford to press pause. It has pledged to make the east coast electricity grid 82% carbon-free by 2030. It will be no mean achievement for a grid that relies on coal and gas for more than 65% of its electricity.

The Australian Labor Party is making the task considerably harder by refusing to remove the long-standing moratorium on nuclear power. Of the dozens of jurisdictions with grids running on 80% clean energy or more, none have achieved it with wind, sunshine and water alone. Nevertheless, Chris Bowen, Australia’s pugnacious energy minister, told a business gathering last month his targets are “very, very achievable for Australia”. His timetable is ambitious: installing a 7mw wind turbine and 16,500 solar panels every 18 hours until 2030, supported by some 10,000km of new transmission lines.

Chalumbin’s fate is in the hands of environment minister Tanya Plibersek, who is expected to make a decision next month. It will be a pivotal moment, ranking alongside the decision by the Labor government of Bob Hawke 40 years ago to block the construction of a hydroelectric dam in Tasmania’s World Heritage-protected Franklin Gorge. Like this one, that decision demanded trade-offs between nature and low-carbon electricity production.

This time, however, the environmental movement that mobilised to stop the Franklin Dam is nowhere to be seen. Their single-minded attention to climate change leads them to regard the destruction of natural biodiversity as a necessary evil. And so they plough on, blind to the realisation that, in Australia as elsewhere, the expansion of wind and solar is constrained by the scarcity of land. We are re-learning the lesson that broke the hearts of Australia’s pioneering farmers in the late 19th century — that even in a country as vast and sparsely populated as this one, you eventually run out of usable terrain.

It was only a matter of time before the iron law of energy density checked the headlong rush for wind and solar. A report last month, jointly sponsored by the Universities of Melbourne, Princeton and Griffith, calculated that 120,179 square kilometres of land would be needed to produce enough renewable energy to achieve Australia’s Net Zero target. That is an area equivalent to 90% of the landmass of England, or half the size of the state of Victoria.

Understandably, not everyone supports the colonisation of this land. In April, Apple pulled out of a deal to buy power from a proposed wind development on the edge of the North Queensland rainforests at Upper Burdekin after a devastating environmental impact report. It found that constructing the wind turbine plant would destroy 769 hectares of koala habitat.

Elsewhere, politicians and environmental bureaucrats are quietly making trade-offs. A proposed wind farm on Robbin Island in north-west Tasmania will only proceed if the operators agree to it shut down for five months each year so as not to disturb the migration of the orange-bellied parrot. Construction of a wind farm in Victoria has been curtailed because of the threat to a local wetland bird species, the brolga.

Chalumbin, meanwhile, has more than its share of vulnerable species, including the greater glider — a cat-sized tree-jumping marsupial with big furry ears, large, round eyes and enormous feather boa-like tail — and the strikingly coloured magnificent broodfrog, so named because of its black and bright-orange marbling. It is also the hunting ground for the red goshawk, one of Australia’s most endangered birds of prey, whose unfortunate habit of flying into hills to gain greater uplift makes them peculiarly vulnerable to turbine strikes.

Tim Nevard, an adjunct professor at the Cairns Institute at James Cook University, describes the application to build on the site as ludicrous. “Biodiversity can’t be destroyed in order to stop climate change,” he said.

A virtue often ignored is the power of the forest to enrich the human spirit. The natural beauty of the rainforests and the Great Barrier Reef attracts 400,000 tourists a year to the region. But it also has a deeper, sacred significance to the Jirrbal people, whose ancestors were here long before the birth of Christ. Those who retain an attachment to the land through blood lines and tradition are distraught by the proposal.

“We are the people of the rainforest,” Jirrbal woman Georgina Weiden told me in a tearful interview. “That’s where life comes from for us. That’s where life begins. Nothing good can come out of it. Our people will start to get sick and suffer. Our spirits will suffer ’cause we’ll start losing connection. It’s a spiritual connection that we’re supposed to look after and protect.”

Her frustration and sense of powerlessness are shared by other Jirrbal people to whom I spoke. It underlines the hollowness of the land rights agreements that have been struck since the Nineties and now cover half the Australian land mass. Jirrbal country is held in trust by the Wabubadda Aboriginal Corporation, a commercial organisation run by an imperfectly elected clique that is only lightly accountable to the people whose interests it represents. The agreement the Corporation has struck with Ark Energy giving its blessing to the Chalumbin development is widely met with scorn by those outside the tribal elite. There is virtually no transparency about the compensation that will be paid, or how those funds will be distributed.

In response, the Jirrbal people, in alliance with local conservationists, are trying to raise funds to fly to Canberra, a distance equivalent to London to Moscow, hoping to put their case to the minister face to face. It is a measure of the unequal battle between a small regional community and the renewable energy companies that they are relying on charity for the fare. For the defenders of Chalumbin, it’s an all-or-nothing fight. If this land isn’t safe from colonisation by big renewables, where is?

“It’s my own Kakadu,” said Patricia, a Jarrbal woman, as we sat on a log overlooking the forest. “We call it Mother Earth. Like a mother looks after you, so you look after your mother, respect your mother.” Patricia recalled with some bitterness the fate of her ancestors, whom she says suffered at the hands of early settlers. She described the wind farm proposal as “just another trick”.

“It’s very cruel to First Nation people,” she said, slowly warming to her choice of words. “Yes — very cruel.”


Nick Cater is the executive director of the Menzies Research Centre and a columnist with The Australian.

nickcater

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

68 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
10 months ago

Here’s Australia’s recent energy mix: “Fossil fuels contributed 71% of total electricity generation in 2021, including coal (51%), gas (18%) and oil (2%).” Even if we could replace that 71% (down from 81% in around 20 years – you do the projections) with a like-for-like amount of solar and wind, neither provide synchronous a.c. power and system inertia and 24-hour power, so the system would need to be supported by a ruinously expensive and electrically problematic fleet of electro-magnetic synchronous devices to deliver the necessary inductive grunt to run the many millions of electric motors, transformers and assorted electro-magnetic devices. If we, as alleged, also need to build 10,000km of transmission lines, we will need the synchronous inertia to control the capacitive load characteristic of power lines. It’s looking to me more and more like we should have saved the money we are spending on renewables, renewable support and lines, and instead invested in the initially expensive but comparatively cheaper nuclear option; especially if we had placed said nuclear plants where the decommissioned coal-fired plants are, and spent the saved money on research. According to zealots like Bowen, renewables are expensive up front but almost free thereafter. This would appear fanciful. Renewables look to be extravagantly expensive up front, not cheap thereafter and, of course, don’t work all the time.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Sadly, logic and reason have long left the net zero movement.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Nothing wrong with the reasoning. What is lacking right now is technology and in the Australia case, correct policies, because as suggested nuclear energy is the only solution to these problems, not fanciful wind farms.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Nothing wrong with the reasoning. What is lacking right now is technology and in the Australia case, correct policies, because as suggested nuclear energy is the only solution to these problems, not fanciful wind farms.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

And I think you missed the bigger point, never mind all the needs of Jo blow ordinary (EVs, electrical devices etc), what about wealth making, job delivering industry? NetZero will require complete deindustrialisation. And anyway no industry of any size could survive if their power source was extremely expensive and unreliable to boot.

Glyn R
Glyn R
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Net Zero is the modern, western equivalent of China’s Great Leap Forward. It will lead to environmental devastation, chaos and great suffering for countless people.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Glyn R

Ye Gods.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
10 months ago
Reply to  Glyn R

That’s a disturbing analogy that I hadn’t thought of, the disturbing part being how well it may fit. The prospect of millions dying should sober anyone up. I do hope it won’t come to that. I hope we’re still sensible enough to burn some fossil fuels and tolerate some warming rather than watch millions of people die, that we can admit we were wrong and set our ideology aside when our pursuit of our ideals caused real human suffering. I am not convinced the current leadership in many nations would pass this basic test of humanity and empathy.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Glyn R

Ye Gods.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
10 months ago
Reply to  Glyn R

That’s a disturbing analogy that I hadn’t thought of, the disturbing part being how well it may fit. The prospect of millions dying should sober anyone up. I do hope it won’t come to that. I hope we’re still sensible enough to burn some fossil fuels and tolerate some warming rather than watch millions of people die, that we can admit we were wrong and set our ideology aside when our pursuit of our ideals caused real human suffering. I am not convinced the current leadership in many nations would pass this basic test of humanity and empathy.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Add to this the hackability of computerised renewables’ systems. Committing cyber crimes is a risk-free triviality for criminals in Australia, because crimes never investigated = crimes never happened = fabulous crime statistics. See the spectacular cluelessness of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security AND Home Affairs (no less) for Australia’s cyber crime exposure.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Sadly, logic and reason have long left the net zero movement.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

And I think you missed the bigger point, never mind all the needs of Jo blow ordinary (EVs, electrical devices etc), what about wealth making, job delivering industry? NetZero will require complete deindustrialisation. And anyway no industry of any size could survive if their power source was extremely expensive and unreliable to boot.

Glyn R
Glyn R
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Net Zero is the modern, western equivalent of China’s Great Leap Forward. It will lead to environmental devastation, chaos and great suffering for countless people.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

Add to this the hackability of computerised renewables’ systems. Committing cyber crimes is a risk-free triviality for criminals in Australia, because crimes never investigated = crimes never happened = fabulous crime statistics. See the spectacular cluelessness of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security AND Home Affairs (no less) for Australia’s cyber crime exposure.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
10 months ago

Here’s Australia’s recent energy mix: “Fossil fuels contributed 71% of total electricity generation in 2021, including coal (51%), gas (18%) and oil (2%).” Even if we could replace that 71% (down from 81% in around 20 years – you do the projections) with a like-for-like amount of solar and wind, neither provide synchronous a.c. power and system inertia and 24-hour power, so the system would need to be supported by a ruinously expensive and electrically problematic fleet of electro-magnetic synchronous devices to deliver the necessary inductive grunt to run the many millions of electric motors, transformers and assorted electro-magnetic devices. If we, as alleged, also need to build 10,000km of transmission lines, we will need the synchronous inertia to control the capacitive load characteristic of power lines. It’s looking to me more and more like we should have saved the money we are spending on renewables, renewable support and lines, and instead invested in the initially expensive but comparatively cheaper nuclear option; especially if we had placed said nuclear plants where the decommissioned coal-fired plants are, and spent the saved money on research. According to zealots like Bowen, renewables are expensive up front but almost free thereafter. This would appear fanciful. Renewables look to be extravagantly expensive up front, not cheap thereafter and, of course, don’t work all the time.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago

I’m sorry, but too many people are ignorant and ill informed. For 20 years, we’ve been told the Great Barrier Reef is on the verge of collapse because of climate change. And now they discover coral growth is at its highest levels ever, since they started recording it 35 years ago. Yet only 4% of Australians even know this. There is not a single electric grid in the face of the earth that is run by wind and solar, yet we keep talking about this as a viable option.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

And now they discover coral growth is at its highest levels ever

I think you’ll find that is largely down to well funded restoration projects.

Adam Bacon
Adam Bacon
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You are deluding yourself surely? We are told constantly that the reefs are dying due to rising ocean temperatures. Has the project managed to restore these to previous levels?
Perhaps if ‘restoration’ is that achievable we could apply it to any or all aspects of alleged anthropogenic global warming!

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Adam Bacon

The project has been planting millions of tolerant corals and creating suitable environments.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

interesting – references?

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The success of h. sapiens & conversion of much of the planet to a human ecological niche creates a custodianship obligation – on our behalf and on behalf of the rest of planetary life.
So it’s pleasing to see adaptation work of this kind.
One query, I didn’t find an overview putting into perspective the success of the project against the scale of the task, nor of projections against various CO2 mitigation scenarios.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Isn’t this a confirmation of what a lot of us have been saying all along, that it would be a more efficient use of resources to fund projects like this that are seeing excellent results than to pursue energy production projects that do great damage to the environment and will ultimately still fail to eliminate the need for fossil fuels? Let’s accept the climate is changing, then adapt and help other creatures and our environment also adapt? After all, if humans didn’t cause the climate to change, something else eventually would. It has happened long before we were here and presumably would continue whether or not we are here to do anything about it. Moreover, there are more distant technological possibilities that will eventually eliminate the need for fossil fuels such as fusion power and/or production of pure hydrogen fuel without fossil fuel inputs. There are proposed ways to redesign our power grid that would massively improve efficiency. There are even proposals for tapping the Yellowstone supervolcano to generate all the power we will ever need and use the new grid to transfer that power coast to coast. Why don’t we see or hear about any of that? Nobody makes any money off any of those proposals. Fusion and other exotic power options would require massive funding and a public push on the scale of the Manhattan project or the moon landing, and despite the progress and knowledge that came from those things, nobody made any money on either. Overhauling the power grid is a similar problem. It simply could not be accomplished with any scheme of subsidies to energy companies and tax incentives to private industry. Further, nobody makes money from restoring coral reefs or preserving forests or any of the other worthwhile real work that is occurring and producing real results. What does make money? Construction projects, government subsidies, and energy regardless of how it’s produced. So, here we have an energy company and a corrupt beureaucratic apparatus conspiring to subvert the public will, get the costs partially subsidized by the government, and create an asset that will produce energy, and therefore revenue, for decades hence using the environment as an excuse for profit. I admire your dedication to the environment Robbie K, but I respectfully ask you to consider whether you’ve been duped. I believe there are solutions to climate change, and many other issues, but they aren’t being pursued because they fall outside the boundaries of the globalist economic philosophies of our technocrat rulers. I believe profiteers are using climate change to enrich themselves with non-solutions that we all pay for and politicians are using it to get votes by frightening people with the specter of global apocalypse, and that current environmental policy, particularly NetZero, is just bad policy however you look at it. It isn’t good for people, the environment, or anybody but the governments and companies that profit directly from it.

Last edited 10 months ago by Steve Jolly
Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The success of h. sapiens & conversion of much of the planet to a human ecological niche creates a custodianship obligation – on our behalf and on behalf of the rest of planetary life.
So it’s pleasing to see adaptation work of this kind.
One query, I didn’t find an overview putting into perspective the success of the project against the scale of the task, nor of projections against various CO2 mitigation scenarios.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Isn’t this a confirmation of what a lot of us have been saying all along, that it would be a more efficient use of resources to fund projects like this that are seeing excellent results than to pursue energy production projects that do great damage to the environment and will ultimately still fail to eliminate the need for fossil fuels? Let’s accept the climate is changing, then adapt and help other creatures and our environment also adapt? After all, if humans didn’t cause the climate to change, something else eventually would. It has happened long before we were here and presumably would continue whether or not we are here to do anything about it. Moreover, there are more distant technological possibilities that will eventually eliminate the need for fossil fuels such as fusion power and/or production of pure hydrogen fuel without fossil fuel inputs. There are proposed ways to redesign our power grid that would massively improve efficiency. There are even proposals for tapping the Yellowstone supervolcano to generate all the power we will ever need and use the new grid to transfer that power coast to coast. Why don’t we see or hear about any of that? Nobody makes any money off any of those proposals. Fusion and other exotic power options would require massive funding and a public push on the scale of the Manhattan project or the moon landing, and despite the progress and knowledge that came from those things, nobody made any money on either. Overhauling the power grid is a similar problem. It simply could not be accomplished with any scheme of subsidies to energy companies and tax incentives to private industry. Further, nobody makes money from restoring coral reefs or preserving forests or any of the other worthwhile real work that is occurring and producing real results. What does make money? Construction projects, government subsidies, and energy regardless of how it’s produced. So, here we have an energy company and a corrupt beureaucratic apparatus conspiring to subvert the public will, get the costs partially subsidized by the government, and create an asset that will produce energy, and therefore revenue, for decades hence using the environment as an excuse for profit. I admire your dedication to the environment Robbie K, but I respectfully ask you to consider whether you’ve been duped. I believe there are solutions to climate change, and many other issues, but they aren’t being pursued because they fall outside the boundaries of the globalist economic philosophies of our technocrat rulers. I believe profiteers are using climate change to enrich themselves with non-solutions that we all pay for and politicians are using it to get votes by frightening people with the specter of global apocalypse, and that current environmental policy, particularly NetZero, is just bad policy however you look at it. It isn’t good for people, the environment, or anybody but the governments and companies that profit directly from it.

Last edited 10 months ago by Steve Jolly
Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

interesting – references?

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Adam Bacon

The project has been planting millions of tolerant corals and creating suitable environments.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The problem is, ‘this is the end of the world’ scaremongering, leading to stupid decisions which we don’t have to take. There was a recent 5-part TV programme made by young, enthusiastic, climate-concerned people, who were all for measues against global warming but totally against the type of government measures we are seeing.
They visited Brazil where people were being paid to cut down trees (for wood) but in the next area the same people were being paid to plant trees because this is what governments wanted. Qantas Airlines charged a ‘climate premium’ which went to a company who planted trees in Brazil. How much simpler it was to use the same labour to cut down trees in the morning and plant new trees in the afternoon.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
10 months ago

To be fair, isn’t that just forestry – plant trees to replace the ones you’ve just harvested?

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
10 months ago

To be fair, isn’t that just forestry – plant trees to replace the ones you’ve just harvested?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I’m gobsmacked. There are literally billions of corals in the GBR over 2,400km and you want us to believe someone planting 10 mill corals a year has saved the reef, even though as early as two years ago we were told half of it was dead.

Adam Bacon
Adam Bacon
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You are deluding yourself surely? We are told constantly that the reefs are dying due to rising ocean temperatures. Has the project managed to restore these to previous levels?
Perhaps if ‘restoration’ is that achievable we could apply it to any or all aspects of alleged anthropogenic global warming!

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The problem is, ‘this is the end of the world’ scaremongering, leading to stupid decisions which we don’t have to take. There was a recent 5-part TV programme made by young, enthusiastic, climate-concerned people, who were all for measues against global warming but totally against the type of government measures we are seeing.
They visited Brazil where people were being paid to cut down trees (for wood) but in the next area the same people were being paid to plant trees because this is what governments wanted. Qantas Airlines charged a ‘climate premium’ which went to a company who planted trees in Brazil. How much simpler it was to use the same labour to cut down trees in the morning and plant new trees in the afternoon.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I’m gobsmacked. There are literally billions of corals in the GBR over 2,400km and you want us to believe someone planting 10 mill corals a year has saved the reef, even though as early as two years ago we were told half of it was dead.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

“We” are not talking about wind and solar being viable to provide sufficient, reliable and affordable energy on their own. Clueless virtue-signalling political types do, like the MP for my electorate who named her newborn “Greta” two years ago.

Bob Downing
Bob Downing
10 months ago
Reply to  Katalin Kish

Oh, dear! My sympathies, but you find them everywhere these days.

Bob Downing
Bob Downing
10 months ago
Reply to  Katalin Kish

Oh, dear! My sympathies, but you find them everywhere these days.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Thats not what have seen from numerous news magazines and documentaries. I’ve actually seen the bleached coral.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

And now they discover coral growth is at its highest levels ever

I think you’ll find that is largely down to well funded restoration projects.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

“We” are not talking about wind and solar being viable to provide sufficient, reliable and affordable energy on their own. Clueless virtue-signalling political types do, like the MP for my electorate who named her newborn “Greta” two years ago.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Thats not what have seen from numerous news magazines and documentaries. I’ve actually seen the bleached coral.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago

I’m sorry, but too many people are ignorant and ill informed. For 20 years, we’ve been told the Great Barrier Reef is on the verge of collapse because of climate change. And now they discover coral growth is at its highest levels ever, since they started recording it 35 years ago. Yet only 4% of Australians even know this. There is not a single electric grid in the face of the earth that is run by wind and solar, yet we keep talking about this as a viable option.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago

It would almost be worth it if the wind farm actually made a difference. Australia will never achieve net zero without vast amounts of nuclear. And the world will never achieve net zero because China simply doesn’t care. And Australia will continue selling coal to China so it can build the solar panels it needs to fuel its net zero fantasies.

How in the world do the policy makers come up with a hare-brained scheme to build a wind farm in Tasmania and shut it down five months of the year? These are the people entrusted to run govt. Let’s build a power plant and only run it seven months a year – in a state with an abundance of water for hydro power.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Tony Reardon
Tony Reardon
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Let’s not forget that the objective is not net zero as a good in itself. It is a only the means whereby it is believed that we can bring about a change to the climate such that some form of undesired weather is avoided. The levels of idiocy piled on idiocy are unbelievable.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

We are best placed to go nuclear as we have the most uranium. But we stupidly have a ban on using nuclear, despite providing uranium for everywhere else.
We should also be the world’s storage repository of nuclear waste as we have loads of room, stable tectonics, and would rake in loads of lolly. But no, we ban that too. We’re a lucky country, but stupid.

dave dobbin
dave dobbin
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

So we stick the nuclear waste in a barrel in a hole in the desert and “she’ll be right mate”. I dont buy it. There’s the transport from all over the world, get it on then off the ships, onto a truck, peel a few iconic species off the trucks roo bars, pour some concrete over it, (as concrete isn’t porous) and a couple of million years later… problem solved.

I don’t like the wind farms in ancient rain forest and don’t think it should go ahead, but unless we can get somewhere with the fusion idea as opposed to fission then nuclear is a no go in my books.

Oh and how much to upgrade France and UKs old reactors messing up the coast line??

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
10 months ago
Reply to  dave dobbin

I agree!

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
10 months ago
Reply to  dave dobbin

I agree!

dave dobbin
dave dobbin
10 months ago
Reply to  Tony Taylor

So we stick the nuclear waste in a barrel in a hole in the desert and “she’ll be right mate”. I dont buy it. There’s the transport from all over the world, get it on then off the ships, onto a truck, peel a few iconic species off the trucks roo bars, pour some concrete over it, (as concrete isn’t porous) and a couple of million years later… problem solved.

I don’t like the wind farms in ancient rain forest and don’t think it should go ahead, but unless we can get somewhere with the fusion idea as opposed to fission then nuclear is a no go in my books.

Oh and how much to upgrade France and UKs old reactors messing up the coast line??

Tony Reardon
Tony Reardon
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Let’s not forget that the objective is not net zero as a good in itself. It is a only the means whereby it is believed that we can bring about a change to the climate such that some form of undesired weather is avoided. The levels of idiocy piled on idiocy are unbelievable.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

We are best placed to go nuclear as we have the most uranium. But we stupidly have a ban on using nuclear, despite providing uranium for everywhere else.
We should also be the world’s storage repository of nuclear waste as we have loads of room, stable tectonics, and would rake in loads of lolly. But no, we ban that too. We’re a lucky country, but stupid.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago

It would almost be worth it if the wind farm actually made a difference. Australia will never achieve net zero without vast amounts of nuclear. And the world will never achieve net zero because China simply doesn’t care. And Australia will continue selling coal to China so it can build the solar panels it needs to fuel its net zero fantasies.

How in the world do the policy makers come up with a hare-brained scheme to build a wind farm in Tasmania and shut it down five months of the year? These are the people entrusted to run govt. Let’s build a power plant and only run it seven months a year – in a state with an abundance of water for hydro power.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Sharon Overy
Sharon Overy
10 months ago

This lunacy doesn’t surprise me – Scotland has done something similar. Windfarms are touted as ‘Green’, but they’ve apparently destroyed 16 million trees to do it!

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
10 months ago
Reply to  Sharon Overy

“Apparently” lol.
Try to give the full facts, would you?
Forestry and Land Scotland have also planted more than 500 million replacement trees since 2000. The quantity felled for wind farms equated roughly to its annual harvesting program.
Which is a lot less dramatic, but perhaps too balanced for you. 
Further, you do not get planning permission without planting replacement trees elsewhere. 
And a windfarm does not take up much space – up to 10 turbines say, with an acre per turbine, and an access track. 
The Highlands were originally cleared of trees to create vast estates for grouse-shooting Englishmen. Not that you have anything to say about that lol.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Indeed, some speed sport is still to be had in those so called Highlands.
The benefits of Culloden so to speak.

Last edited 10 months ago by Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Indeed, some speed sport is still to be had in those so called Highlands.
The benefits of Culloden so to speak.

Last edited 10 months ago by Charles Stanhope
Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
10 months ago
Reply to  Sharon Overy

“Apparently” lol.
Try to give the full facts, would you?
Forestry and Land Scotland have also planted more than 500 million replacement trees since 2000. The quantity felled for wind farms equated roughly to its annual harvesting program.
Which is a lot less dramatic, but perhaps too balanced for you. 
Further, you do not get planning permission without planting replacement trees elsewhere. 
And a windfarm does not take up much space – up to 10 turbines say, with an acre per turbine, and an access track. 
The Highlands were originally cleared of trees to create vast estates for grouse-shooting Englishmen. Not that you have anything to say about that lol.

Sharon Overy
Sharon Overy
10 months ago

This lunacy doesn’t surprise me – Scotland has done something similar. Windfarms are touted as ‘Green’, but they’ve apparently destroyed 16 million trees to do it!

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago

Read Judith Curry’s latest book: “Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking our Response”. The idea that we face a human-caused climate catastrophe is highly speculative (“very unlikely”, to use the IPCC’s language), and the policy response of Net Zero is both inappropriate and unachievable without societal costs that have not been explained and will not be acceptable.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Curry is a total fraud and has a long history of climate change denial, so don’t swallow this appeasement approach.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I’ll be looking for reasoned rebuttals rather than insults framed in language designed to recall the Nazis and the Holocaust.

Kerry Davie
Kerry Davie
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

The fact that he employs that phrase “climate change denial” is proof enough that he hasn’t the faintest idea about this issue. There are literally no ‘climate change deniers’ (including Judith Curry); anybody who is capable of thinking will acknowledge that the climate changes, it always has over Earth’s long history, and always will in the future.

Kerry Davie
Kerry Davie
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

The fact that he employs that phrase “climate change denial” is proof enough that he hasn’t the faintest idea about this issue. There are literally no ‘climate change deniers’ (including Judith Curry); anybody who is capable of thinking will acknowledge that the climate changes, it always has over Earth’s long history, and always will in the future.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You never answer any queries or points which you don’t agree with – except by calling people names : in your world you have sceptics, deniers, boomers – all childish namecalling.
You also don’t see that people on this site ARE concerned about climate change but the problem is that the governments are not good enough to see it through.
So, you have the single idea – it doesn’t matter what bad things the governments do, we just have to cross our fingers and toes and hope that everything comes right in the end.
As a scientist working in power transmission and electricity storage, I could give you many examples of how stupid politicians are doing even more stupid things because they can’t even manage a p**s up in a brewery. So you and your friends mumble ..mm.. deniers..boomers..old people.. to each other and just hope for the best.

Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You are likely to be respected and listened to if you proffer measured argument and politely made points; but not if you resort to intemperate, insulting language!

Andrew N
Andrew N
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Robbie, ad hominem attacks, in what way is Currey a fraud?

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Andrew N

Don’t feed the troll.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Andrew N

Don’t feed the troll.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I’ll be looking for reasoned rebuttals rather than insults framed in language designed to recall the Nazis and the Holocaust.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You never answer any queries or points which you don’t agree with – except by calling people names : in your world you have sceptics, deniers, boomers – all childish namecalling.
You also don’t see that people on this site ARE concerned about climate change but the problem is that the governments are not good enough to see it through.
So, you have the single idea – it doesn’t matter what bad things the governments do, we just have to cross our fingers and toes and hope that everything comes right in the end.
As a scientist working in power transmission and electricity storage, I could give you many examples of how stupid politicians are doing even more stupid things because they can’t even manage a p**s up in a brewery. So you and your friends mumble ..mm.. deniers..boomers..old people.. to each other and just hope for the best.

Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You are likely to be respected and listened to if you proffer measured argument and politely made points; but not if you resort to intemperate, insulting language!

Andrew N
Andrew N
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Robbie, ad hominem attacks, in what way is Currey a fraud?

Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Even reading Wikipedia’s entry on Judith Curry, and making allowance for Wikipedia’s left-wing bias, it is evident that she is a heavyweight academic and intellectual with a track record to boot; and to dismiss her as a ‘total fraud’ is somewhat unconvincing.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Chipoko

You can read the inside story about Curry and her dangerous views here:
“She has played a particularly pernicious role in the climate change denial campaign, laundering standard denier talking points but appearing to grant them greater authority courtesy of the academic positions she has held and the meager but nonetheless legitimate scientific work that she has published in the past,”
https://www.eenews.net/articles/judith-curry-retires-citing-craziness-of-climate-science/

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

yes the article sets out well her doubts and her wish to rethink our approach to the risks. The quotation you have picked out doesn’t reflect the rest of the piece at all, and comes from somebody who has incited personal attacks on her in the past. “laundering standard denier talking points” tells you all you need to know about the speaker.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Well there’s also this profile, which goes on to explain a great deal and how she works for the fossil fuel industry.
It’s important to bear in mind that organisations such as Exxon have sought out maverick scientists and paid them handsomly to cast doubt on the subject, they are very clever at it.
https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Well there’s also this profile, which goes on to explain a great deal and how she works for the fossil fuel industry.
It’s important to bear in mind that organisations such as Exxon have sought out maverick scientists and paid them handsomly to cast doubt on the subject, they are very clever at it.
https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

This is nothing more than a smear job. She clearly believes that CO2 is a problem, so what exactly is she saying that is so problematic? This is the problem with the issue. The climate change industrial complex rolls over everyone who questions the catastrophic narrative.

We are constantly told forest fires are worse than ever, there are more intense storms, the world is experiencing unprecedented drought – like this is established fact. Why does NASA remain silent when its own research shows forest fires are decreasing and the world is 5% greener?

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Curry and Lomborg are the most dangerous voices of all since they sound very reasonable and support their opinions with ‘facts’ (strawmen). There are many people that believe we are too late already to stop this crisis, so the last thing we need is scepticism and denial dressed up as reasoned debate to ‘rethink the response’. These type of publications are a crime against humanity.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Think about what you’re saying here. Curry and Lomborg are dangerous because they sound reasonable – as opposed to what? Irrational. Maybe they sound reasonable because they are reasonable. They support their opinions with ‘facts’. Since when is a fact not a fact? Many people believe it’s already too late to stop the crisis. Every statement you make is emotional. Maybe it’s time we let reason play a role – before a country like Australia completely decarbonizes its economy while explicitly forbidding the use of nuclear.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Maybe you should consider that besides anything else Curry and Lomborg are making a tidy living from peddling this crap. They have found a niche of readers who are already sceptical and play to their biases with their strawmen – exactly the kind of nonsense you come out with such as ‘the great barrier reef is growing’ so therefore ‘what crisis’?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Do you think alarmists are not getting paid? Michael Mann hired a PR firm to handle all his speaking engagements, until it was exposed and he dropped the agency. NASA’s budget was decimated by funding to cuts to the space program. Climate alarmism rescued them from funding oblivion. Greenpeace and the WWF use climate alarmism in their funding campaigns all the time. Does this make their hysterical claims wrong? Of course not – because it’s not actually an argument. You keep mentioning strawman arguments? What are these specifically? Everything you mention is vague and emotional. Facts will set you free.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece spouting a standard conservative line. The issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of consumables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians. Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large land against environmental vandalism. Be this in the forests, on the plains, in the oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna.


Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You come across as a bigot with rigid views and a propensity to use crude language and insults, neither of which lend any credibility to the points you attempt advance. Not impressive!

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Do you think alarmists are not getting paid? Michael Mann hired a PR firm to handle all his speaking engagements, until it was exposed and he dropped the agency. NASA’s budget was decimated by funding to cuts to the space program. Climate alarmism rescued them from funding oblivion. Greenpeace and the WWF use climate alarmism in their funding campaigns all the time. Does this make their hysterical claims wrong? Of course not – because it’s not actually an argument. You keep mentioning strawman arguments? What are these specifically? Everything you mention is vague and emotional. Facts will set you free.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece spouting a standard conservative line. The issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of consumables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians. Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large land against environmental vandalism. Be this in the forests, on the plains, in the oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna.


Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You come across as a bigot with rigid views and a propensity to use crude language and insults, neither of which lend any credibility to the points you attempt advance. Not impressive!

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Maybe you should consider that besides anything else Curry and Lomborg are making a tidy living from peddling this crap. They have found a niche of readers who are already sceptical and play to their biases with their strawmen – exactly the kind of nonsense you come out with such as ‘the great barrier reef is growing’ so therefore ‘what crisis’?

starkbreath
starkbreath
9 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

That last line undercuts any reasonableness in your arguments.This is the kind of over the top hysteria that leads to the heavy handed Net Zero policies that are being imposed more and more on an unwilling populace. Oh I know, it’s for their own good. Like what happened to the people in Sri Lanka.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Think about what you’re saying here. Curry and Lomborg are dangerous because they sound reasonable – as opposed to what? Irrational. Maybe they sound reasonable because they are reasonable. They support their opinions with ‘facts’. Since when is a fact not a fact? Many people believe it’s already too late to stop the crisis. Every statement you make is emotional. Maybe it’s time we let reason play a role – before a country like Australia completely decarbonizes its economy while explicitly forbidding the use of nuclear.

starkbreath
starkbreath
9 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

That last line undercuts any reasonableness in your arguments.This is the kind of over the top hysteria that leads to the heavy handed Net Zero policies that are being imposed more and more on an unwilling populace. Oh I know, it’s for their own good. Like what happened to the people in Sri Lanka.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Last edited 10 months ago by Jonathan Nash
Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Curry and Lomborg are the most dangerous voices of all since they sound very reasonable and support their opinions with ‘facts’ (strawmen). There are many people that believe we are too late already to stop this crisis, so the last thing we need is scepticism and denial dressed up as reasoned debate to ‘rethink the response’. These type of publications are a crime against humanity.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Last edited 10 months ago by Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

yes the article sets out well her doubts and her wish to rethink our approach to the risks. The quotation you have picked out doesn’t reflect the rest of the piece at all, and comes from somebody who has incited personal attacks on her in the past. “laundering standard denier talking points” tells you all you need to know about the speaker.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

This is nothing more than a smear job. She clearly believes that CO2 is a problem, so what exactly is she saying that is so problematic? This is the problem with the issue. The climate change industrial complex rolls over everyone who questions the catastrophic narrative.

We are constantly told forest fires are worse than ever, there are more intense storms, the world is experiencing unprecedented drought – like this is established fact. Why does NASA remain silent when its own research shows forest fires are decreasing and the world is 5% greener?

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Chipoko

You can read the inside story about Curry and her dangerous views here:
“She has played a particularly pernicious role in the climate change denial campaign, laundering standard denier talking points but appearing to grant them greater authority courtesy of the academic positions she has held and the meager but nonetheless legitimate scientific work that she has published in the past,”
https://www.eenews.net/articles/judith-curry-retires-citing-craziness-of-climate-science/

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Not JUST unexplained and unacceptable: also unknown, because no calculation takes into account the hackability of computerised systems.

With the exception of ransomware attacks, theft of money/identity, child-sexual-abuse and the likes, it is impossible to prove that an incident is the result of a cyber-crime, let alone proving a cyber-criminal’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This makes cyber-crimes risk-free triviality, irrespective of impact as I have been forced to learn daily, hourly, since 2009 in inner Melbourne, Australia.

I had to give up trying to earn a salary as an ex-refugee, e-commerce world-champion workaholic MBA in 2017 due to the severity of ongoing cyber-crimes against me. Trying to report cyber-crimes I was treated as if I tried to report BigFoot riding a UFO. Our sole law enforcement entity Victoria Police even forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal in 2019-2020 in an admitted silencing attempt. This backfired, because by self-representing I gained a much bigger voice.

Cyber-crime capabilities gravitate to the highest bidders from the services of gifted amateurs to government insiders who know they can never be caught selling what they learn on the job, borrowing or recreating devices, let alone punished. No legitimate company can match the financial capabilities without any legal constraints Australia’s billionaire bikies have.

See my public perfect crimes article on LinkedIn for risks Australia’s fake facade of law-and-order pose. Crime-hiding, police blocking crime-reporting attempts, terrorising crime-witnesses and victims into silent oblivion works so well in Australia, I lived within a 10km radius 1988-2008 of where a stalker coworker’s onslaught of crimes against me started in 2009, and knew nothing of Australia’s lawlessness. I never even dated the stalker or any of his accomplices. His crimes are ongoing. Last cyber-crime less than 2 hours ago, last bikie visit to my home at dawn today. I have owned my home since 2001 in a suburb of million $ homes in Melbourne, never mixed with criminals of any kind.

Or just check out the spectacular cluelessness of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security AND Home Affairs for what to expect via rogue insiders from places like the Australian Signals Directorate participating in organised crime alongside rogue cops. Australia’s bikie billionaires show off their risk-free criminality with bone-chilling innocence for good reasons.

Last edited 10 months ago by Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Katalin Kish

PS: watch out for what’s going on in Australia. This is one of my desperate public interest disclosures. Writing is my only weapon fighting Australia’s devastating crime and corruption.

The spectacularly incompetent hubris demonstrated by Australia’s governments isn’t a harmless joke for those who live outside of Australia’s physical borders: Australia faked its way into Five Eyes, AUKUS and who knows what else, and the Internet is everywhere.

The tech capabilities flaunted by Australia’s privileged government insiders committing devastating crimes completely risk-free for the sadistic predators aren’t curtailed by geography or jurisdictions.

The enthusiastic destruction of Australia’s remaining fabric via harebrained greeny projects pushed by our vacuous Lefty minister hunting “Babe in the Woods Barbie” photo ops on morning TV is only a symptom of the traditional lack of accountability of Australia’s top office holders, their freedom to play amateur theatre on the world stage, while building stellar resumes.

Ms O’Neil (1) has nothing to worry about of course. She is safely detached from the consequences of her actions as her predecessors have been for many decades. Some of how this works is explored in UnHerd’s How PwC captured Australia article.

There are good reasons why Australia needs Royal Commissions into paedophilia for example, in spite of having all the laws, regulations, “commissions” with lofty names, etc. anyone could think of – only for the findings of the Royal Commissions to be sealed for 80(!) years.

Similarly, we had to have a Royal Commission into financial institutions’ charging dead people consulting fees amongst other clever ways of making profit in spite of their incompetence. Don’t expect any entities to change their practices though, because of any adverse findings of RCs or anyone else.

It is surreal to experience being an adversary to Australia’s authorities (1) and to Australia’s criminals (2) both expressing childish indignation about someone like me challenging their risk-free enjoyment of wanton destruction/crimes punishable by 10 years in jail/worse each – in my quest of trying to free myself from ongoing crimes since 2009/trying to alert the world to the risks Australia’s actual lawlessness poses.

Given the volume and range of attacks, I must be doing something right.

As a former refugee turned e-commerce world champion MBA workaholic earning a healthy surplus, I’d expected to quietly give back to society for many more decades by 2009, when a stalker IT Helpdesk Assistant of cringe-worthy cowardice and incompetence chose me to witness the range of criminal acts he gets to commit without any risk of punishment.

The stalker had (still has?) unrestricted access via his job at the Victorian Electoral Commission to the up-to-date home address of every woman and to the whereabouts of anyone in witness protection in the state of Victoria, possibly the whole of Australia.

Guess who would value having access to the whereabouts of people in witness protection the most?

When I tried to alert the executive of the Victorian Electoral Commission to the stalker’s crimes, I was forced to resign in a hurry. The stalker kept his job for at least another 5 years, the manager who openly supported the stalker’s crimes was promoted.

The stalker’s crimes are ongoing to this day, 1 September 2023. I saw him, or someone impersonating him down to his absurd displays of vanity a week ago without disguises on the footpath across my home. Last unmissable cyber-crime a few seconds ago – writing this at 11:10am in a Melbourne suburb of million $ homes, where I have owned my own home since 2001. I just experienced another bikie visit also. I never chose to have anything to do with the stalker, with bikies, drug traffickers, Victoria Police officers or any other criminals. I had no idea about Australia being a cesspit of crimes until 2009. Crime hiding, witness/victim intimidation into silent oblivion, witness/victim discreditation are practised to perfection.

All I ever wanted since 2009 was to be free from the stalker’s crimes.

This is why I tried to report his crimes to Victoria Police as he kept breaking into my home not just while I worked long hours, but also at night, leaving sickening signs of his visits, showing off having access to physical break-in capabilities far beyond what a civilian lock-smith could compete with. I only saw Victoria Police officers openly participating in the stalker’s crimes in broad daylight a decade later, in 2019, while Victoria Police forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt.

I only learned in 2020 reading Victoria Police Corruption“, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 1999. that bizarre crimes are committed to discredit crime witnesses and victims by Victoria Police and their criminal disciples.

The stalker is evidently a gifted bizarre crime practitioner, an enthusiastic disciple of criminal Victoria Police officers.

I was reading Raymond T. Hoser’s books after successfully stopping Victoria Police ‘s macabre circus forcing me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt – hint: prosecutors bluff. Being stranded surviving crime-to-crime in my home all the same.

Raymond T. Hoser paid an enormous sacrifice documenting Victoria Police‘s crimes and corruption. His works, like my sworn Affidavit to court show signs of being relentlessly harassed via every possible means to stop us from documenting glimpses of Australia’s absurd crime reality. I have suffered the first obvious air-gap breach and various remote physical harm incidents causing at times frightening phantom physical symptoms and temporary brain-fog from the time I declared self-representation against Victoria Police in 2019. You don’t have to be a VIP in Australia to experience whatever is causing Havana Syndrome.

The stalker’s crimes only occurred when it was my turn as only one of at least seven of his concurrent stalking targets just from Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) 2009-2012.

I have been subjected to utterly bizarre crimes in addition to obvious vulgar brutality and senseless vandalism/sabotage/contamination of things people need to use in industrialised countries to the extent I didn’t just have to give up trying earn a salary in 2017, give up going to even dance classes in 2018, give up having my investment properties tenanted in 2021: I am isolated in my home in an effort to limit my exposure to crimes/crimes spilling over to people who associate with me in any capacity.

If you are naive enough to fight Australia’s crime and corruption, you need to understand: witness/victim discreditation is a highly effective method of making crime and corruption risk-free.

You might find yourself being subjected to seemingly pointless attacks, experience bizarre crimes, being flooded with false alerts, etc., until you stop trying to fight crime and corruption.

Not knowing about the ingenious use of bizarre incidents to discredit witnesses and victims of heinous crimes, thus making these crimes completely risk-free, I stopped reading Fiona Barnett‘s posts years ago.

Fiona Barnett recalled seeing something like 10-foot-tall “super” soldiers in her last I article I read.

Was she subjected to some smoke and mirrors trick that she dutifully recalled not realising that she fell into a discreditation trap?

Horses for courses of course.

As a Science graduate with a Mathematics major from Monash University and an MBA from Deakin University I am subjected to tech not known to civilian experts (see my Perfect Crimes article) e.g. a Farady Cage breach demo in 2022, as a form of discreditation. Mentioning the Farady Cage breach months after it occurred severed my last connection to friends: the friend who has a PhD in General Relativity dismissed my experience outright as against the laws of physics.

Showing fine-tuned discreditation expertise is using tech not known to civilian experts to achieve unprovable, nonsensical, trivial outcomes only, when there is no one else but the victim present, who could understand the tech crimes delivered.

Being under 24x7x365 surveillance is flaunted via waking me up to strange sounds at night inside my bedroom, turning the sound’s volume down when I get out of bed to investigate, turning it up, when I go back to bed. Without me turning on any lights or touching my drapes. This happened many times until I trained myself not to respond. Given the obvious house and car break-ins, last unmissable home break in over the night of 13-14 April 2023, I have no idea what is planted where and why.

In Australia crime victims aren’t just on their own, we are up against Australia’s authorities (1) and the criminals (2) committing crimes, both category wanting to keep the status quo of Australia’s successful faking of law and order.

Can you see yet, why Australia’s narcissistic clown government members pose serious risks to people far beyond Australia’s borders?

I am neither a willing, nor an incompetent or cowardly victim. What is being done to me can be done to anyone.

Brutalised and traumatised daily/hourly by the injustice of risk-free, devastating crimes forced on me by people I never chose to have anything to do with, I only have two choices: commit suicide or fight.

I never wanted this role, I know how pitiful my efforts must seem as that One Jew.

I will keep fighting all the same, until I have no reasons to fight: until I can go back to earning a salary, until I can go hiking and dancing again, until I can communicate via the phone again with friends and family, until I can contribute to society again via supporting a range of charities and individuals on an as-needed basis as I did before the stalker’s unpunished crimes crippled me.


(1) corrupt Victoria Police and the office of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security and Home Affairs (no less).

(2) Australia’s organised crime, vulgar hill-billy thugs flourishing even in inner-Melbourne, e.g. the MEEHAN Horde of Thugs featuring vulgar bikies, sadistic pervert Victoria Police officers, insiders from places like the Australian Signals Directorate, and the stalker MEEHAN having unrestricted access to everyone’s up-to-date home address.

Last edited 10 months ago by Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Katalin Kish

PS: watch out for what’s going on in Australia. This is one of my desperate public interest disclosures. Writing is my only weapon fighting Australia’s devastating crime and corruption.

The spectacularly incompetent hubris demonstrated by Australia’s governments isn’t a harmless joke for those who live outside of Australia’s physical borders: Australia faked its way into Five Eyes, AUKUS and who knows what else, and the Internet is everywhere.

The tech capabilities flaunted by Australia’s privileged government insiders committing devastating crimes completely risk-free for the sadistic predators aren’t curtailed by geography or jurisdictions.

The enthusiastic destruction of Australia’s remaining fabric via harebrained greeny projects pushed by our vacuous Lefty minister hunting “Babe in the Woods Barbie” photo ops on morning TV is only a symptom of the traditional lack of accountability of Australia’s top office holders, their freedom to play amateur theatre on the world stage, while building stellar resumes.

Ms O’Neil (1) has nothing to worry about of course. She is safely detached from the consequences of her actions as her predecessors have been for many decades. Some of how this works is explored in UnHerd’s How PwC captured Australia article.

There are good reasons why Australia needs Royal Commissions into paedophilia for example, in spite of having all the laws, regulations, “commissions” with lofty names, etc. anyone could think of – only for the findings of the Royal Commissions to be sealed for 80(!) years.

Similarly, we had to have a Royal Commission into financial institutions’ charging dead people consulting fees amongst other clever ways of making profit in spite of their incompetence. Don’t expect any entities to change their practices though, because of any adverse findings of RCs or anyone else.

It is surreal to experience being an adversary to Australia’s authorities (1) and to Australia’s criminals (2) both expressing childish indignation about someone like me challenging their risk-free enjoyment of wanton destruction/crimes punishable by 10 years in jail/worse each – in my quest of trying to free myself from ongoing crimes since 2009/trying to alert the world to the risks Australia’s actual lawlessness poses.

Given the volume and range of attacks, I must be doing something right.

As a former refugee turned e-commerce world champion MBA workaholic earning a healthy surplus, I’d expected to quietly give back to society for many more decades by 2009, when a stalker IT Helpdesk Assistant of cringe-worthy cowardice and incompetence chose me to witness the range of criminal acts he gets to commit without any risk of punishment.

The stalker had (still has?) unrestricted access via his job at the Victorian Electoral Commission to the up-to-date home address of every woman and to the whereabouts of anyone in witness protection in the state of Victoria, possibly the whole of Australia.

Guess who would value having access to the whereabouts of people in witness protection the most?

When I tried to alert the executive of the Victorian Electoral Commission to the stalker’s crimes, I was forced to resign in a hurry. The stalker kept his job for at least another 5 years, the manager who openly supported the stalker’s crimes was promoted.

The stalker’s crimes are ongoing to this day, 1 September 2023. I saw him, or someone impersonating him down to his absurd displays of vanity a week ago without disguises on the footpath across my home. Last unmissable cyber-crime a few seconds ago – writing this at 11:10am in a Melbourne suburb of million $ homes, where I have owned my own home since 2001. I just experienced another bikie visit also. I never chose to have anything to do with the stalker, with bikies, drug traffickers, Victoria Police officers or any other criminals. I had no idea about Australia being a cesspit of crimes until 2009. Crime hiding, witness/victim intimidation into silent oblivion, witness/victim discreditation are practised to perfection.

All I ever wanted since 2009 was to be free from the stalker’s crimes.

This is why I tried to report his crimes to Victoria Police as he kept breaking into my home not just while I worked long hours, but also at night, leaving sickening signs of his visits, showing off having access to physical break-in capabilities far beyond what a civilian lock-smith could compete with. I only saw Victoria Police officers openly participating in the stalker’s crimes in broad daylight a decade later, in 2019, while Victoria Police forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt.

I only learned in 2020 reading Victoria Police Corruption“, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 1999. that bizarre crimes are committed to discredit crime witnesses and victims by Victoria Police and their criminal disciples.

The stalker is evidently a gifted bizarre crime practitioner, an enthusiastic disciple of criminal Victoria Police officers.

I was reading Raymond T. Hoser’s books after successfully stopping Victoria Police ‘s macabre circus forcing me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt – hint: prosecutors bluff. Being stranded surviving crime-to-crime in my home all the same.

Raymond T. Hoser paid an enormous sacrifice documenting Victoria Police‘s crimes and corruption. His works, like my sworn Affidavit to court show signs of being relentlessly harassed via every possible means to stop us from documenting glimpses of Australia’s absurd crime reality. I have suffered the first obvious air-gap breach and various remote physical harm incidents causing at times frightening phantom physical symptoms and temporary brain-fog from the time I declared self-representation against Victoria Police in 2019. You don’t have to be a VIP in Australia to experience whatever is causing Havana Syndrome.

The stalker’s crimes only occurred when it was my turn as only one of at least seven of his concurrent stalking targets just from Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) 2009-2012.

I have been subjected to utterly bizarre crimes in addition to obvious vulgar brutality and senseless vandalism/sabotage/contamination of things people need to use in industrialised countries to the extent I didn’t just have to give up trying earn a salary in 2017, give up going to even dance classes in 2018, give up having my investment properties tenanted in 2021: I am isolated in my home in an effort to limit my exposure to crimes/crimes spilling over to people who associate with me in any capacity.

If you are naive enough to fight Australia’s crime and corruption, you need to understand: witness/victim discreditation is a highly effective method of making crime and corruption risk-free.

You might find yourself being subjected to seemingly pointless attacks, experience bizarre crimes, being flooded with false alerts, etc., until you stop trying to fight crime and corruption.

Not knowing about the ingenious use of bizarre incidents to discredit witnesses and victims of heinous crimes, thus making these crimes completely risk-free, I stopped reading Fiona Barnett‘s posts years ago.

Fiona Barnett recalled seeing something like 10-foot-tall “super” soldiers in her last I article I read.

Was she subjected to some smoke and mirrors trick that she dutifully recalled not realising that she fell into a discreditation trap?

Horses for courses of course.

As a Science graduate with a Mathematics major from Monash University and an MBA from Deakin University I am subjected to tech not known to civilian experts (see my Perfect Crimes article) e.g. a Farady Cage breach demo in 2022, as a form of discreditation. Mentioning the Farady Cage breach months after it occurred severed my last connection to friends: the friend who has a PhD in General Relativity dismissed my experience outright as against the laws of physics.

Showing fine-tuned discreditation expertise is using tech not known to civilian experts to achieve unprovable, nonsensical, trivial outcomes only, when there is no one else but the victim present, who could understand the tech crimes delivered.

Being under 24x7x365 surveillance is flaunted via waking me up to strange sounds at night inside my bedroom, turning the sound’s volume down when I get out of bed to investigate, turning it up, when I go back to bed. Without me turning on any lights or touching my drapes. This happened many times until I trained myself not to respond. Given the obvious house and car break-ins, last unmissable home break in over the night of 13-14 April 2023, I have no idea what is planted where and why.

In Australia crime victims aren’t just on their own, we are up against Australia’s authorities (1) and the criminals (2) committing crimes, both category wanting to keep the status quo of Australia’s successful faking of law and order.

Can you see yet, why Australia’s narcissistic clown government members pose serious risks to people far beyond Australia’s borders?

I am neither a willing, nor an incompetent or cowardly victim. What is being done to me can be done to anyone.

Brutalised and traumatised daily/hourly by the injustice of risk-free, devastating crimes forced on me by people I never chose to have anything to do with, I only have two choices: commit suicide or fight.

I never wanted this role, I know how pitiful my efforts must seem as that One Jew.

I will keep fighting all the same, until I have no reasons to fight: until I can go back to earning a salary, until I can go hiking and dancing again, until I can communicate via the phone again with friends and family, until I can contribute to society again via supporting a range of charities and individuals on an as-needed basis as I did before the stalker’s unpunished crimes crippled me.


(1) corrupt Victoria Police and the office of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security and Home Affairs (no less).

(2) Australia’s organised crime, vulgar hill-billy thugs flourishing even in inner-Melbourne, e.g. the MEEHAN Horde of Thugs featuring vulgar bikies, sadistic pervert Victoria Police officers, insiders from places like the Australian Signals Directorate, and the stalker MEEHAN having unrestricted access to everyone’s up-to-date home address.

Last edited 10 months ago by Katalin Kish
Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Curry is a total fraud and has a long history of climate change denial, so don’t swallow this appeasement approach.

Chipoko
Chipoko
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Even reading Wikipedia’s entry on Judith Curry, and making allowance for Wikipedia’s left-wing bias, it is evident that she is a heavyweight academic and intellectual with a track record to boot; and to dismiss her as a ‘total fraud’ is somewhat unconvincing.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan Nash

Not JUST unexplained and unacceptable: also unknown, because no calculation takes into account the hackability of computerised systems.

With the exception of ransomware attacks, theft of money/identity, child-sexual-abuse and the likes, it is impossible to prove that an incident is the result of a cyber-crime, let alone proving a cyber-criminal’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This makes cyber-crimes risk-free triviality, irrespective of impact as I have been forced to learn daily, hourly, since 2009 in inner Melbourne, Australia.

I had to give up trying to earn a salary as an ex-refugee, e-commerce world-champion workaholic MBA in 2017 due to the severity of ongoing cyber-crimes against me. Trying to report cyber-crimes I was treated as if I tried to report BigFoot riding a UFO. Our sole law enforcement entity Victoria Police even forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal in 2019-2020 in an admitted silencing attempt. This backfired, because by self-representing I gained a much bigger voice.

Cyber-crime capabilities gravitate to the highest bidders from the services of gifted amateurs to government insiders who know they can never be caught selling what they learn on the job, borrowing or recreating devices, let alone punished. No legitimate company can match the financial capabilities without any legal constraints Australia’s billionaire bikies have.

See my public perfect crimes article on LinkedIn for risks Australia’s fake facade of law-and-order pose. Crime-hiding, police blocking crime-reporting attempts, terrorising crime-witnesses and victims into silent oblivion works so well in Australia, I lived within a 10km radius 1988-2008 of where a stalker coworker’s onslaught of crimes against me started in 2009, and knew nothing of Australia’s lawlessness. I never even dated the stalker or any of his accomplices. His crimes are ongoing. Last cyber-crime less than 2 hours ago, last bikie visit to my home at dawn today. I have owned my home since 2001 in a suburb of million $ homes in Melbourne, never mixed with criminals of any kind.

Or just check out the spectacular cluelessness of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security AND Home Affairs for what to expect via rogue insiders from places like the Australian Signals Directorate participating in organised crime alongside rogue cops. Australia’s bikie billionaires show off their risk-free criminality with bone-chilling innocence for good reasons.

Last edited 10 months ago by Katalin Kish
Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago

Read Judith Curry’s latest book: “Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking our Response”. The idea that we face a human-caused climate catastrophe is highly speculative (“very unlikely”, to use the IPCC’s language), and the policy response of Net Zero is both inappropriate and unachievable without societal costs that have not been explained and will not be acceptable.

Andrew Horsman
Andrew Horsman
10 months ago

An age old story of conflation of means with ends; of what happens when purpose and meaning are lost; and of the unbending avarice, stupidity, carelessness, corruption, and greed of human ruling elites. Perhaps wind turbines are to us (if you accept Jared Diamond’s theory that is now on the cusp of cancellation) what the statues of Easter Island were to the Easter Islanders: enormous symbols of defiance and belief in a failing ideology that served to accelerate, rather than to halt, an impending societal collapse. Except they probably won’t last long as the Easter Island statues did, and at least the statues look good.

Andrew Horsman
Andrew Horsman
10 months ago

An age old story of conflation of means with ends; of what happens when purpose and meaning are lost; and of the unbending avarice, stupidity, carelessness, corruption, and greed of human ruling elites. Perhaps wind turbines are to us (if you accept Jared Diamond’s theory that is now on the cusp of cancellation) what the statues of Easter Island were to the Easter Islanders: enormous symbols of defiance and belief in a failing ideology that served to accelerate, rather than to halt, an impending societal collapse. Except they probably won’t last long as the Easter Island statues did, and at least the statues look good.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago

So Australia is cheerfully destroying its environment to bow down to the NetZero God and earn big halo polishing points while at the same time exporting coal to China to continue increasing their release of global warming gases. There is seems to be a bit of a problem here.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Johanna Barry

Whilst that might sound odd the article ought to explain that Australia mostly export high quality coking coal for the steel industry.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The article does not talk sending coal to China. That was my comment to highlight the complete hypocrisy of the dialogue around NetZero. Mining is a huge part of the economy and the government would be out of power the instant they said mining had to stop to save the planet. On top of that they rely on the money from mining to sustain the country’s wealth. Interestingly, Victoria was in dire straits during the winter because they sold all the gas they produced overseas because green energy was the fuel of choice for the state. In other words it is fine for the rest of the world to use fossil fuels, just don’t let the local population enjoy the country’s natural resources in the name of saving the planet.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The article does not talk sending coal to China. That was my comment to highlight the complete hypocrisy of the dialogue around NetZero. Mining is a huge part of the economy and the government would be out of power the instant they said mining had to stop to save the planet. On top of that they rely on the money from mining to sustain the country’s wealth. Interestingly, Victoria was in dire straits during the winter because they sold all the gas they produced overseas because green energy was the fuel of choice for the state. In other words it is fine for the rest of the world to use fossil fuels, just don’t let the local population enjoy the country’s natural resources in the name of saving the planet.

Robbie K
Robbie K
10 months ago
Reply to  Johanna Barry

Whilst that might sound odd the article ought to explain that Australia mostly export high quality coking coal for the steel industry.

Johanna Barry
Johanna Barry
10 months ago

So Australia is cheerfully destroying its environment to bow down to the NetZero God and earn big halo polishing points while at the same time exporting coal to China to continue increasing their release of global warming gases. There is seems to be a bit of a problem here.

Kerry Davie
Kerry Davie
10 months ago

‘Net Zero’ is a senseless, stupid, obsession.

Kerry Davie
Kerry Davie
10 months ago

‘Net Zero’ is a senseless, stupid, obsession.

Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago

Last edited 10 months ago by Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
Jonathan Nash
10 months ago

Last edited 10 months ago by Jonathan Nash
Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
10 months ago

Don’t expect wisdom or even common-sense from Australia’s Left. We have Left wall-to-wall at every level of government decision making. In the meantime we have no functional law-enforcement, i.e. not even physical security in suburbs of million $ homes in the electorate of Clare O’Neil, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security and Home Affairs in Melbourne.
My elderly neighbour just came over to tell me, the resident thief of our neighbourhood was caught in the act again. I caught her in July 2022 stealing from my garage. None of us report her of course. 1) the thief won’t be deterred, only angered, and she knows where we live 2) Victoria Police, our sole law-enforcement, openly participate in crimes themselves.

Fran Martinez
Fran Martinez
10 months ago

This is so sad.

Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden
10 months ago

Net Zero is becoming the most potent tenet of the Marxist revival yet. It’s actually a form of punishing corporatism which could just as easily unite Fascist economics with Leninist cultural programme.

Rob C
Rob C
9 months ago

1100 hectares isn’t very much and it certainly isn’t half the area of Melbourne, which is 999,300 hectares (metro) and approximately 200,000 proper.

Last edited 9 months ago by Rob C
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece a paid up member of the ironically named Centre for Independent Studies and can always be relied upon the spout a standard ultra-conservative and anti “green left” (their term) line. Strange how the issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of renewables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians, viz. the reflexive No in our upcoming referendum. Certainly, there are issues with climate change, the loss of biodiversity and species extinction, and the threat of summer wildfires hands over us once more, but Australians as a whole, and their governments are aware of the problems but struggle to compensate for a decade of environmental neglect by a succession of inept conservative governments Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large and unique land against environmental vandalism, be this in our forests, on our plains, in our oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna. And yet, demographically, we remain a divided, conservative and , for despite our multicultural and cosmopolitan image, insular and apathetic electorate. Fear of change, and hence clinging to an unsatisfactory status quo, is, arguably our default condition. As Xavier Herbert, one of iconic authors once entitled his masterpiece, “poor fella my country”.

Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece a paid up member of the ironically named Centre for Independent Studies and can always be relied upon the spout a standard ultra-conservative and anti “green left” (their term) line. Strange how the issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of renewables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians, viz. the reflexive No in our upcoming referendum. Certainly, there are issues with climate change, the loss of biodiversity and species extinction, and the threat of summer wildfires hands over us once more, but Australians as a whole, and their governments are aware of the problems but struggle to compensate for a decade of environmental neglect by a succession of inept conservative governments Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large and unique land against environmental vandalism, be this in our forests, on our plains, in our oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna. And yet, demographically, we remain a divided, conservative and , for despite our multicultural and cosmopolitan image, insular and apathetic electorate. Fear of change, and hence clinging to an unsatisfactory status quo, is, arguably our default condition. As Xavier Herbert, one of iconic authors once entitled his masterpiece, “poor fella my country”.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
10 months ago

As if the author, or anyone reading Unherd, gave a fig about Aboriginals. 
Big uproar about a wind farm, and a breathless clickbait headline suggesting destruction of forests on a scale equivalent to Brazilian loggers.
Reality is that you do not get planning permission without planting replacement trees elsewhere.
And a windfarm does not take up much space – up to 10 turbines say, with an acre per turbine, and an access track.
 Oh, and the Aboriginals are also up in arms about fossils fuels – see:
https://news.mongabay.com/2018/11/fracking-threatens-aboriginal-land-rights-in-western-australia/
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/indigenous-australians-seek-block-36-billion-santos-gas-project-2022-06-07/
There’d be less Unherd upticks for that though – bad, bad Abos – our support is conditional on what kind of industry you attack lol.
Hypocrites? Look in the mirror ha ha

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

it is amusing to point out alleged green hypocrisy and until greens campaign for nuclear how can they be taken seriously?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

I think this is fair. I doubt there would be much outrage if they were building a gas fired power plant on aboriginal land.

However, wind turbine projects take up much more room than one acre per turbine. This project is using 25 acres per turbine. Each turbine might take up only one acre, but they have to be spread out from each other. One acre per turbine might even be fine if the project was being built on farmland because you can farm between each turbine. Other than farming, the land between each turbine is basically useless.

Solar and wind have the lowest energy density of any form of power production, requiring more land than gas, coal and nuclear. I might be wrong about this, but I believe for every unit of energy produced by nuclear you need 300 times more land for wind. And of course, nuclear can be built where current transmission lines already exist. For wind, you need to build that much more infrastructure.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece spouting a standard conservative line. The issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of consumables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians. Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large land against environmental vandalism. Be this in the forests, on the plains, in the oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

it is amusing to point out alleged green hypocrisy and until greens campaign for nuclear how can they be taken seriously?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

I think this is fair. I doubt there would be much outrage if they were building a gas fired power plant on aboriginal land.

However, wind turbine projects take up much more room than one acre per turbine. This project is using 25 acres per turbine. Each turbine might take up only one acre, but they have to be spread out from each other. One acre per turbine might even be fine if the project was being built on farmland because you can farm between each turbine. Other than farming, the land between each turbine is basically useless.

Solar and wind have the lowest energy density of any form of power production, requiring more land than gas, coal and nuclear. I might be wrong about this, but I believe for every unit of energy produced by nuclear you need 300 times more land for wind. And of course, nuclear can be built where current transmission lines already exist. For wind, you need to build that much more infrastructure.

Last edited 10 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
10 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Quite so. Cater is a Newcorp mouthpiece spouting a standard conservative line. The issue of nuclear power always comes up when he and his mob talk of consumables. And they do not give a fig about our indigenous Australians. Meanwhile, there is indeed outrage and protest across our large land against environmental vandalism. Be this in the forests, on the plains, in the oceans and rivers, and upon our unique flora and fauna.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
10 months ago

As if the author, or anyone reading Unherd, gave a fig about Aboriginals. 
Big uproar about a wind farm, and a breathless clickbait headline suggesting destruction of forests on a scale equivalent to Brazilian loggers.
Reality is that you do not get planning permission without planting replacement trees elsewhere.
And a windfarm does not take up much space – up to 10 turbines say, with an acre per turbine, and an access track.
 Oh, and the Aboriginals are also up in arms about fossils fuels – see:
https://news.mongabay.com/2018/11/fracking-threatens-aboriginal-land-rights-in-western-australia/
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/indigenous-australians-seek-block-36-billion-santos-gas-project-2022-06-07/
There’d be less Unherd upticks for that though – bad, bad Abos – our support is conditional on what kind of industry you attack lol.
Hypocrites? Look in the mirror ha ha