TOPIC:

jackspratt wrote:

The Preacher wrote: I also am thankful that we may get some sense of balance with our re-elected government and PM in the debate around political correctness
Gender Identity and Renewable Energy. These areas have been controlled by the Loony left for too long and the
"silent majority" need to be able to be heard!

Well Preacher, it seems you are preaching from the wrong scripture when it comes to renewables.

The annual Lowy Institute Poll on Australian attitudes to the world and global issues for 2018 has been released. Among a series of interesting findings, one thing is clear: support for climate action and renewable energy continue to grow.

In response to the survey’s questions on climate and energy, 59% of respondents agreed with the statement: “climate change is a serious and pressing problem. We should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs.”........

......What’s more, while the federal government doggedly pursues a “technology-neutral” energy policy, Australians don’t seem to be buying it. Public support for a large-scale energy transition in Australia is even more emphatic than support for climate action.

According to the Lowy poll, which involved a nationally representative sample of 1,200 adults, 84% of Australians support the statement that “the government should focus on renewables, even if this means we may need to invest more in infrastructure to make the system more reliable”.

theconversation.com/lowy-institute-poll-...el-in-a-decade-98625

The "silent majority" you preach would seem to be a very noisy minority.

Are the 84% all "loony left"?

Jack please don't misquote me!

I said that "I am thankful that we may get some sense of balance with our re-elected government and PM in the debate around political correctness
Gender Identity and Renewable Energy"

I would have thought that given the election result you would have a better understanding as to why so many people will not answer polls OR will simply provide a YES or NO.

Very few people will answer truthfully to 'Pollsters', particularly if the question is slanted in such a way as to suggest that a "negative response" to any question regarding Climate Chage (renewables included) Gender Identity and Political Correctness will make them cop physical, verbal or online abuse from the radical left.

Australia's baseload energy requirements will never be met by "renewables". To force the closure of so many of our base load providing coal mines overt the past 15 years without ANY baseload alternative has compromised our security, lost thousands of jobs and doubled the cost of our electricity supplies. Whilst the worlds major uses of coal continue to build coal producing plants, whilst in Australia we continue to force the closure of ours.. It is a pointless exercise which will never have any effect on the world climate change.

Australia has the world's largest resources of low-cost uranium. Australia currently exports all the its production of uranium oxide per year from three operating uranium mines.Why is Nuclear Energy not part of the debate if zero carbon emissions is what we want.

Thirteen countries currently produce at least one-quarter of their electricity from nuclear. France gets 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy; Hungary, Slovakia and Ukraine get more than 50% from nuclear, whilst Belgium, Sweden, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Finland South Korea and Czech Republic 30%. Japan gets 25%. The USA, UK, Spain, Romania and Russia get 20% from nuclear.

Let us have some balance in all the debates.

Sorry Reverend, but I haven't misquoted you.

You stated (and I paraphrase) that "the debate around ........ renewable energy ...... have (has) been controlled by the Loony left for far too long"

I then linked to a credible poll which shows that "84% of Australians support the statement that “the government should focus on renewables, even if this means we may need to invest more in infrastructure to make the system more reliable”.

I find it hard to see how 84% ( no matter how you try to discredit polling methodology) can all represent the "Loony left". - another loaded term, I might add.

They certainly do constitute a very large majority however - with the remaining 16% representing the silent minority.

jackspratt wrote: Sorry Reverend, but I haven't misquoted you.

You stated (and I paraphrase) that "the debate around ........ renewable energy ...... have (has) been controlled by the Loony left for far too long"

I then linked to a credible poll which shows that "84% of Australians support the statement that “the government should focus on renewables, even if this means we may need to invest more in infrastructure to make the system more reliable”.

I find it hard to see how 84% ( no matter how you try to discredit polling methodology) can all represent the "Loony left". - another loaded term, I might add.

They certainly do constitute a very large majority however - with the remaining 16% representing the silent minority.

I love these types of polls supposedly conducted by the “independent” think tanks.

Just structure your questions in order to obtain the conclusions you are seeking.

There was nothing stated as a preamble to any of the questions put in the poll which may lead a respondent to answer differently.
Were they told that of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, humans cause only 3.4% percent of annual CO2 emissions and of that amount Australia’s contribution to annual CO2 emissions is only 1.3% of the 3.4%? That is 0.0442%. That nothing Australia does in respect to reducing CO2 emissions can ever have any material impact on world climate change and of the projected net job losses, after compliance with the regulations.

I didn’t see any mention of the real price tag associated with attempting to reduce such a small part of the atmosphere on something that Australia cannot control.

Were the respondents to your poll advised that renewables can never be replace baseload power or that Australia’s current baseload requirements have already been substantially compromised and that we would all be subject to an increasing number of phased blackouts around the country if we go down this road. That commercial investment would be severely compromised without any guarantees relating to future baseload energy supplies.

Were they told the real cost of renewable energy and that our electricity prices would likely double again from current levels if renewables are the only alternative to be considered? Were they told that the subsequent increases in power prices be likely leave their children and grandchildren having to pay prices that would simply be unaffordable.

Were they told that with nuclear energy we could have zero emissions and dramatically reduced prices and substantial new infrastructure investment in our country?

If the poll had provided sufficient information or an alternative for Nuclear Energy before asking the questions then I suggest the support for renewables would be nothing like the results of the poll in question.

In their election manifesto Labor wanted 50% renewable energy for electricity generation by 2030, but wait for it The Greens want 100% by then.

The “Pollsters” tried to make the “Average Australians” believe that Labor had all the support in the last election in respect to climate change, gender identity and political correctness and failed miserably.

If you don’t learn from history you will continue to make the same mistakes.

Beautifully articulated Preacher.

So Reverend, please give us your evidence that:

"the debate around ........ renewable energy ...... have (has) been controlled by the Loony left for far too long, and the
"silent majority" need to be able to be heard"

You've seen mine - now show me yours.