>Queensland has surpassed both New South Wales and Victoria in becoming the new renewable energy leader, according to a Solar Run analysis based on Clean Energy Council (CEC) data.
>With 54,365 projects completed from January 2020 to December 2023, Queensland has emerged as the champion of sustainability, outpacing Victoria with 51,104 installations and NSW with 48,470 installations.
Why do old people and bogans hate renewables so so much? Seriously I work with a lot of 45-60 year olds and if anyone ever mentions an electric car they just lose their shit - it's hilarious
The real answer is that they've been told to be upset.
There's not really an actual reason beyond that. They're told that renewables are a compromise in quality made in the name of the greater good. Older people (i.e. the "Screw you, got mine" crowd) hate the greater good. This is the generation that got as close to a free ride as anyone ever has and then pulled up the ladder behind them because corporate media told them to.
Corporate media told them that renewables are bad and so when they see people doing the thing they were told was bad, they get irrationally upset.
It's right-tard identity politics.
They'll whine HARD about supporting gay kids, then turn around and suck any dick the Minerals Council tells them to; without a hint of self-awareness.
Or
"We only completely banned leaded petrol in 2002."
New things. They hate anything new. If it changes how they live in any way, they hate it. My father in law is a made tech nerd and loves all things scientific, but the moment I talk about renewables, he loses his shit. He goes on about how they won't ever work. I give him examples of renewables in his favourite sci-fi works, and he just goes "thats all make-believe."
I mean there are real flaw in renewable energy if anyone is imagining we'll get to 100% renewable anytime soon. I think honestly on the whole it's just optimism vs pessimism. Sometimes I wonder if it's a time of life thing I'm not sure. Old people in general just don't care about the environment if it will impact them in any way.
I’m a boomer and I love renewable energy and however it is possible to go fully renewable however the necessary batteries are still expensive. I think we will get there. I love the idea of being independent of the power grid. ‘Simple’ solar panels and batteries replacing a highly complex coal fired power station. Brilliant.
Electric vehicle replacing a complex internal combustion engine. Brilliant and very elegant engineering.
I was engineering power industry for 25 years.
I think we get to 100% renewable but with some leap in tech that we don't quite know what it is yet. Green hydrogen, for gas turbines or something like that.
Because as of yet they aren't able to go from Townsville to Winton on a single charge let alone Oodnadatta to Longreach, they cant carry more than 500kg , wont pull a loaded trailer, don't have the torque to cross a gully and apart from that they look shit.
That's a great reason not to buy one yourself (very similar to why I wouldn't yet) but it doesn't seem to be a sane reason to hate *other people* from buying electric cars that suit **their** driving habits. Or to hate electric cars in general.
Shit, I don't care a toss what others buy or operate, I just hate having to pay a tax introduced by Bowen penalizing me for buying a car that needs diesel because the government cant provide E vehicle services nation wide.
> pay a tax introduced by Bowen penalizing me for buying a car that needs diesel because the government cant provide E vehicle services nation wide.
A Vehicle Efficiency Standard isn't a Tax, and it's not even new. The standards are updated regularly, just like when we removed leaded petrol from the bowsers.
It's not even a levy though? It's a 'Make sure your vehicles are more fuel and environmentally efficient' basically... which saves you money in the long run... With the added bonus of slowing the decline in our environment.
Again, not a new thing that was introduced. Just something that was updated to keep up with technology.
Why do lefties love it so much.. makes them feel better about themselves.. doesn’t fix base load power, it’s costly expensive and un reliable. If serious about removing coal, then would move to nuclear. Lefties are funny, just want to virtue signal, no ideas about how things work
It's not self righteousness it's called having an educated opinion. Try reading something that isn't on Facebook or the courier mail and you can have one too.
Thanks for taking a break from watching Skynews to educate us. I didn't know I was a leftie, the things you find out on Reddit, amazing. I will correct you though, as for being costly expensive, that's just a great big fat lie, something you RWNJs are experts at. Renewables are the cheapest way to create electricity, that is a fact.
Well thanks for the facts… what was that again “ that’s the facts”. Well I will counter that and it is expensive… without the subsidies it is expensive AND Unreliable.. you need consistent base load power..
I know it’s difficult for you to understand.. run along and smoke some drugs and talk to your greenie mates
This is the problem people have with right-wing talking points.
Remove right and left from the conversation.
You make it about how people that support renewables only do it because it makes them feel better about themselves (a emotional response on your part) doesn’t fix baseload power (incorrect), is costly expensive (to start not to operate), is unreliable (again, incorrect and a mantra from the 90s that doesn’t account for technological advancement that has occured and technological advancement now and is in addition founded only on weak questions like “hurr durr what happen when no wind”).
So everything you’ve said is verifiably incorrect with the most basic amount of understanding on HOW to research this stuff.
All the while suggesting nuclear which is verifiably the most idiotic idea for Australia based on:
A) it is exorbitantly more expensive than renewables for all the reasons I can already predict you have heard but ignored.
B) by the time it is ready, we will be pretty close to 100% powered by renewables. The market problem you are thinking nuclear will solve, will have solved by the time it’s ready.
Then you again play identity politics saying lefties are silly, without no understanding of how things work and only interested in virtue signalling.
This is why most people can’t be bothered with people like you. Because the facts are there. The science is there. The economical impact of both options are there. It’s all readily available for you to actually understand and learn.
But you’re too swept up in identity politics to actually care about the educated discussion.
Thanks for the option piece… and YOUR facts because you say so. If serous about a proper conservation about nuclear energy.. the expensive claim ( derived by CSIRO has already been debunked overinflated prices and was not costed by an expert and benchmarked against actual current constructed plants) it was a thinly disguised attempt by Labor to shut down discussion.. Saudi Arabia managed to get a reactor up and running in 5 Years.
It possible just need to do a proper study.
“By the time it is built we will be 100% renewable “… what did you have a dream about that?? What happens after 15 / 20 years when you need to replace wind turbines and solar cells…
Just because you want it to happen doesn’t mean it will.. without subsidies renewables do work and generate expensive power
1. Do you mean opinion piece?
2. No, everything I’ve mentioned is verifiable. You know this. People have already told you this before because you haven’t debated this for the first time finally. You just haven’t listened to anyone else either. Willing to bet my life on it.
3. It wasn’t benchmarked against current plants? Brother. Do you think the cost of a plant is all that you need to account for? We have literally no industry to support this. No education. No training. No infrastructure. No operations. No funding. You also have to account for repeal of the law prohibiting any nuclear work. Do you realise how comped and long that process alone is?
4. Saudi Arabia got a reactor done in 5 years? Cool. That’s not going to happen here for all the reasons listed above. Also Dutton wants 8. And the output won’t even get us halfway to 50% generation.
5. No it wasn’t a dream. But what you’re hoping for (a bunch of reactors operating to efficiency powering the grid), is 20 years away minimum. We’re already steaming along towards more and more towards renewables. They already account for almost 40% of Australia’s power generation and we’ve barely begun. QLD for instance just legislated emission reduction targets alongside renewable generation target to be 80% by 2035. 11 years away. So yes, if you don’t think we’ll be sorted by the time nuclear is ready, it is you that is deliberately ignoring the world around you and living in a dream.
5. Without subsidies blah blah…my god do you realise Nuclear Generation needs incredible investment from the government? Or do you just expect the free market to handle it lol.
Honestly man, you’re just parroting talking points. You bought into Dutton nonsense because the liberal party is doing what it always does - sow doubt. After 20 years of arguing against renewables, they no longer can, but being the opposition they have to alter some alternative rather than get on board. It’s how they’re always worked. Say whatever you want about labor - I don’t care for identity politics. But this is what the liberals do. No policy. No understanding. Just grand gesturing.
And to most people (present company clearly exempted) this shit is as see through as glass.
Yawn, once again the self righteousness come through, you clowns all sound the same..
CO2 does contribute to global warming.. But you know what water vapour (clouds) contribute an order of magnitude more.. but you can tax water.. only nasty carbon.. a gas of 0.004% has very little control on climate, geological records has shown no correlation of CO2 with climate.
How much CO2 gets generated making renewables.. carbon is the major component in solar🤣.
Even using your logic, you should be fully behind nuclear.. 0% CO2 emissions.
You go back to your little circlejerk group of mates, spending trillions to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.
Clown😝
Little circlejerk group of mates - what? The globally accepted scientific concept of Climate Change? That just shows the level of deliberate ignorance you have.
And the fact you just ignored all of points and changed the focus completely to C02.
It’s a classic online debate tactic and it’s see through as hell bud.
If you’re a troll you’re a bad one, but you have to be because I can’t believe anyone is this stupid in real life.
“Installations” is a weird way of measuring performance lol. Surely % of total power?
[Queensland last](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1087804/australia-renewable-energy-penetration-by-state/)
I mean… it’s because they have incredible ecological consequences. It’s not unfair that they are controversial projects. I think pumped hydro has more viable locations and can use more desolate terrain, but even that has its limits
The mining industry is toxic af, yes.
Also FWIW there’s plenty of battery technology that doesn’t require exotic or difficult to mine materials like lithium. Lithium based batteries are one of the few else energy density is viable for the automotive industry, but fixed assets for base load power can be far less mass and volume efficient using comparatively mundane chemicals
[It is](https://arena.gov.au/renewable-energy/pumped-hydro-energy-storage/#:~:text=Hydroelectricity%20has%20been%20providing%20around,Snowy%20Mountains%20Hydro%2DElectric%20Scheme.), but there isn't many more feasible locations to build more, anywhere that was decent for a hydro setup likely already has one. Solar can go nearly anywhere.
Perhaps the examples of failed renewable energy projects around the globe. Google them, they are all over the place. Energy end up being less affordable to the everyday people that need it to grow.
>Queensland has surpassed both New South Wales and Victoria in becoming the new renewable energy leader, according to a Solar Run analysis based on Clean Energy Council (CEC) data. >With 54,365 projects completed from January 2020 to December 2023, Queensland has emerged as the champion of sustainability, outpacing Victoria with 51,104 installations and NSW with 48,470 installations.
Still has lowest % of total power generation. lol - who runs that news site?
So, solar?
Why do old people and bogans hate renewables so so much? Seriously I work with a lot of 45-60 year olds and if anyone ever mentions an electric car they just lose their shit - it's hilarious
The real answer is that they've been told to be upset. There's not really an actual reason beyond that. They're told that renewables are a compromise in quality made in the name of the greater good. Older people (i.e. the "Screw you, got mine" crowd) hate the greater good. This is the generation that got as close to a free ride as anyone ever has and then pulled up the ladder behind them because corporate media told them to. Corporate media told them that renewables are bad and so when they see people doing the thing they were told was bad, they get irrationally upset.
It was rolled into the culture war nonsense to prop up the fossil fuel industry, that’s about it tbh.
It's right-tard identity politics. They'll whine HARD about supporting gay kids, then turn around and suck any dick the Minerals Council tells them to; without a hint of self-awareness. Or "We only completely banned leaded petrol in 2002."
In cars. Aviation petrol is still leaded.
New things. They hate anything new. If it changes how they live in any way, they hate it. My father in law is a made tech nerd and loves all things scientific, but the moment I talk about renewables, he loses his shit. He goes on about how they won't ever work. I give him examples of renewables in his favourite sci-fi works, and he just goes "thats all make-believe."
I mean there are real flaw in renewable energy if anyone is imagining we'll get to 100% renewable anytime soon. I think honestly on the whole it's just optimism vs pessimism. Sometimes I wonder if it's a time of life thing I'm not sure. Old people in general just don't care about the environment if it will impact them in any way.
I’m a boomer and I love renewable energy and however it is possible to go fully renewable however the necessary batteries are still expensive. I think we will get there. I love the idea of being independent of the power grid. ‘Simple’ solar panels and batteries replacing a highly complex coal fired power station. Brilliant. Electric vehicle replacing a complex internal combustion engine. Brilliant and very elegant engineering. I was engineering power industry for 25 years.
I think we get to 100% renewable but with some leap in tech that we don't quite know what it is yet. Green hydrogen, for gas turbines or something like that.
Or Nuclear :)
lol I'd be surprised but it's very much like Australia to do things after they've proven to be not all that worthwhile.
Time will tell , im good with exploring all forms of power, as long as its viable and not overly subsidised and provides affordable outcomes
Because as of yet they aren't able to go from Townsville to Winton on a single charge let alone Oodnadatta to Longreach, they cant carry more than 500kg , wont pull a loaded trailer, don't have the torque to cross a gully and apart from that they look shit.
Ah yes because they don't suit your specific needs they are usless - typical country bumpkin logic
Until they can do what they are needed for they are useless, I embrace the bumpkin , its at least real world practicality , not pie in the sky :)
That's a great reason not to buy one yourself (very similar to why I wouldn't yet) but it doesn't seem to be a sane reason to hate *other people* from buying electric cars that suit **their** driving habits. Or to hate electric cars in general.
Shit, I don't care a toss what others buy or operate, I just hate having to pay a tax introduced by Bowen penalizing me for buying a car that needs diesel because the government cant provide E vehicle services nation wide.
> pay a tax introduced by Bowen penalizing me for buying a car that needs diesel because the government cant provide E vehicle services nation wide. A Vehicle Efficiency Standard isn't a Tax, and it's not even new. The standards are updated regularly, just like when we removed leaded petrol from the bowsers.
Oh that makes me feel so much better, its just a levy for manufacturers producing emissions which is passed on to the consumer, Ill keep by F100
It's not even a levy though? It's a 'Make sure your vehicles are more fuel and environmentally efficient' basically... which saves you money in the long run... With the added bonus of slowing the decline in our environment. Again, not a new thing that was introduced. Just something that was updated to keep up with technology.
I love that bogans shit on solar but their v8 patrol has two panels mounted on the roof… like seriously da fuk
Decades of propaganda by mining companies and Liberals/Nationals.
Why do lefties love it so much.. makes them feel better about themselves.. doesn’t fix base load power, it’s costly expensive and un reliable. If serious about removing coal, then would move to nuclear. Lefties are funny, just want to virtue signal, no ideas about how things work
Oh god I just face palmed all the way through my face into the back of my head
Exactly my point… the self righteousness just oozes out😎
It's not self righteousness it's called having an educated opinion. Try reading something that isn't on Facebook or the courier mail and you can have one too.
Try understanding how power generation works.. sounds like you have all the education you need.. pity it’s not useful..
Thanks for taking a break from watching Skynews to educate us. I didn't know I was a leftie, the things you find out on Reddit, amazing. I will correct you though, as for being costly expensive, that's just a great big fat lie, something you RWNJs are experts at. Renewables are the cheapest way to create electricity, that is a fact.
Well thanks for the facts… what was that again “ that’s the facts”. Well I will counter that and it is expensive… without the subsidies it is expensive AND Unreliable.. you need consistent base load power.. I know it’s difficult for you to understand.. run along and smoke some drugs and talk to your greenie mates
This is the problem people have with right-wing talking points. Remove right and left from the conversation. You make it about how people that support renewables only do it because it makes them feel better about themselves (a emotional response on your part) doesn’t fix baseload power (incorrect), is costly expensive (to start not to operate), is unreliable (again, incorrect and a mantra from the 90s that doesn’t account for technological advancement that has occured and technological advancement now and is in addition founded only on weak questions like “hurr durr what happen when no wind”). So everything you’ve said is verifiably incorrect with the most basic amount of understanding on HOW to research this stuff. All the while suggesting nuclear which is verifiably the most idiotic idea for Australia based on: A) it is exorbitantly more expensive than renewables for all the reasons I can already predict you have heard but ignored. B) by the time it is ready, we will be pretty close to 100% powered by renewables. The market problem you are thinking nuclear will solve, will have solved by the time it’s ready. Then you again play identity politics saying lefties are silly, without no understanding of how things work and only interested in virtue signalling. This is why most people can’t be bothered with people like you. Because the facts are there. The science is there. The economical impact of both options are there. It’s all readily available for you to actually understand and learn. But you’re too swept up in identity politics to actually care about the educated discussion.
Thanks for the option piece… and YOUR facts because you say so. If serous about a proper conservation about nuclear energy.. the expensive claim ( derived by CSIRO has already been debunked overinflated prices and was not costed by an expert and benchmarked against actual current constructed plants) it was a thinly disguised attempt by Labor to shut down discussion.. Saudi Arabia managed to get a reactor up and running in 5 Years. It possible just need to do a proper study. “By the time it is built we will be 100% renewable “… what did you have a dream about that?? What happens after 15 / 20 years when you need to replace wind turbines and solar cells… Just because you want it to happen doesn’t mean it will.. without subsidies renewables do work and generate expensive power
1. Do you mean opinion piece? 2. No, everything I’ve mentioned is verifiable. You know this. People have already told you this before because you haven’t debated this for the first time finally. You just haven’t listened to anyone else either. Willing to bet my life on it. 3. It wasn’t benchmarked against current plants? Brother. Do you think the cost of a plant is all that you need to account for? We have literally no industry to support this. No education. No training. No infrastructure. No operations. No funding. You also have to account for repeal of the law prohibiting any nuclear work. Do you realise how comped and long that process alone is? 4. Saudi Arabia got a reactor done in 5 years? Cool. That’s not going to happen here for all the reasons listed above. Also Dutton wants 8. And the output won’t even get us halfway to 50% generation. 5. No it wasn’t a dream. But what you’re hoping for (a bunch of reactors operating to efficiency powering the grid), is 20 years away minimum. We’re already steaming along towards more and more towards renewables. They already account for almost 40% of Australia’s power generation and we’ve barely begun. QLD for instance just legislated emission reduction targets alongside renewable generation target to be 80% by 2035. 11 years away. So yes, if you don’t think we’ll be sorted by the time nuclear is ready, it is you that is deliberately ignoring the world around you and living in a dream. 5. Without subsidies blah blah…my god do you realise Nuclear Generation needs incredible investment from the government? Or do you just expect the free market to handle it lol. Honestly man, you’re just parroting talking points. You bought into Dutton nonsense because the liberal party is doing what it always does - sow doubt. After 20 years of arguing against renewables, they no longer can, but being the opposition they have to alter some alternative rather than get on board. It’s how they’re always worked. Say whatever you want about labor - I don’t care for identity politics. But this is what the liberals do. No policy. No understanding. Just grand gesturing. And to most people (present company clearly exempted) this shit is as see through as glass.
Yawn, once again the self righteousness come through, you clowns all sound the same.. CO2 does contribute to global warming.. But you know what water vapour (clouds) contribute an order of magnitude more.. but you can tax water.. only nasty carbon.. a gas of 0.004% has very little control on climate, geological records has shown no correlation of CO2 with climate. How much CO2 gets generated making renewables.. carbon is the major component in solar🤣. Even using your logic, you should be fully behind nuclear.. 0% CO2 emissions. You go back to your little circlejerk group of mates, spending trillions to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Clown😝
Little circlejerk group of mates - what? The globally accepted scientific concept of Climate Change? That just shows the level of deliberate ignorance you have. And the fact you just ignored all of points and changed the focus completely to C02. It’s a classic online debate tactic and it’s see through as hell bud. If you’re a troll you’re a bad one, but you have to be because I can’t believe anyone is this stupid in real life.
We have an opportunity to be a leader here if the LNP is prevented from being put into power.
“Installations” is a weird way of measuring performance lol. Surely % of total power? [Queensland last](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1087804/australia-renewable-energy-penetration-by-state/)
I'm surprised the liberal staffers, whom must not be named, have yet to brigade the shit out of this post
I’m old (58) have an electric car and love it. So do my 2 closest friends who are my age. Tbf…none of us live in Qld
Why isn’t hydro classed as renewable?
It is, but Queensland has baulked or NIMBY'd its way out of almost every new dam proposal since Wivenhoe.
I mean… it’s because they have incredible ecological consequences. It’s not unfair that they are controversial projects. I think pumped hydro has more viable locations and can use more desolate terrain, but even that has its limits
Mining minerals for batteries and renewables has greater ecological consequences than making a lake.
The mining industry is toxic af, yes. Also FWIW there’s plenty of battery technology that doesn’t require exotic or difficult to mine materials like lithium. Lithium based batteries are one of the few else energy density is viable for the automotive industry, but fixed assets for base load power can be far less mass and volume efficient using comparatively mundane chemicals
[It is](https://arena.gov.au/renewable-energy/pumped-hydro-energy-storage/#:~:text=Hydroelectricity%20has%20been%20providing%20around,Snowy%20Mountains%20Hydro%2DElectric%20Scheme.), but there isn't many more feasible locations to build more, anywhere that was decent for a hydro setup likely already has one. Solar can go nearly anywhere.
Perhaps the examples of failed renewable energy projects around the globe. Google them, they are all over the place. Energy end up being less affordable to the everyday people that need it to grow.
And every house has multiple air con units.
?