Senators Madigan & Day: Keep Pounding the Great Wind Power Fraud

CLAY LISTON

Senators Day & Madigan: it ain’t over till we say so.

 ****

Following almost 6 months of solid graft, 8 hearings in 4 States and the ACT, dozens of witnesses and almost 500 submissions, the Senate Inquiry into the great wind power fraud delivered its ‘doorstop’ final report, which runs to some 350 pages – available here: Senate Report

The first 200 pages are filled with facts, clarity, common sense and compassion; the balance, labelled “Labor’s dissenting report”, was written by the wind industry’s parasites and spruikers – including the Clean Energy Council (these days a front for Infigen aka Babcock & Brown); the Australian Wind Alliance; and Leigh Ewbank from the Enemies of the Earth.

Predictably, Labor’s dissenting report is filled with fantasy, fallacy and fiction – pumping up the ‘wonders’ of wind; completely ignoring the cost of the single greatest subsidy rort in the history of the Commonwealth; and treating the wind industry’s hundreds of unnecessary victims – of incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound – with the kind of malice, usually reserved for sworn and bitter foreign enemies.

Among those Senators on the Committee – who pulled no punches in getting the truth out – were Family First’s Bob Day and STT Champion, Victorian Independent, John Madigan..

In the fortnight or so since the Senators’ report was published, the wind industry and its parasites have been steadily working their way through the five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance (see our post here).

Part of which has led their propaganda parrots to attack the Inquiry for “bias”. By which they mean – despite all of their concerted efforts to prevent it happening – the truth got out; and they’ve got no hope of ever putting it back into the bottle.

And – amid an hysterical cacophony of sound and fury – the wind industry’s parasites are left with fading hopes that the Committee’s suite of wind industry killing recommendations will all just ‘blow over’ – we think that fits in the “denial” category.

Always pleased to disappoint the beleaguered and dwindling band of wind worshippers in this country, STT is delighted that Bob Day and John Madigan show no sign of letting up.

Here’s video of Bob Day still on the front foot in the Senate last Wednesday [Hansard – transcript follows].

****

***

THE SENATE PROOF
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Wind Farms
QUESTION
Wednesday, August 12 2015

Senator DAY (South Australia):  My question is to the Assistant Minister for the Education and Training, Senator Birmingham, representing the Minister for the Environment. On 3 August, the Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines tabled its final report. In chapter 2 it states:

… there has been a clear disconnect: between the official position that wind turbines cause no harm to human health and the strong and continuing empirical, biological and anecdotal evidence of many people living in proximity to turbines suffering from similar physiological symptoms and distress.

The committee noted that evidence from at least 15 countries has started piling up on similar adverse effects and are reported by people with no geographical, linguistic or other personal associations with each other. Does the government accept the committee’s recommendations insofar as they relate to adverse health impacts?

Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Assistant Minister for Education and Training):  I thank Senator Day for both the question and some advance notice of the question.

Mr President, through you to Senator Day: of course, as you acknowledged in your question, the Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines tabled its final report on 3 August. That was just nine days ago. The government will respond in good faith to the recommendations of that report, but of course it will take a little longer to consider the detail of those recommendations. It is worth noting that, while the government is still considering its response to all of the recommendations, we are taking action in a number of ways. The government has agreed to appoint an independent scientific committee to provide research and advice on the impact on the environment and on human health of wind turbine sound and infrasound. The government has also committed to establishing a wind farm commissioner to resolve complaints about the operation of wind farms. While the consideration is taking place the government certainly will make sure that it gives full consideration to the details of the report, which I know you, Senator Day, and other members of that committee worked very hard on, and the evidence that you received. We will make sure that we have all thought and proper consideration and we will respond in the usual way, as the government does to Senate reports.

Senator DAY (South Australia):  Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Australia has over 1,800 turbines in 71 locations, with more on the way. Paul Hyslop, from ACIL Allen, says that Labor’s 50 per cent renewable energy pledge by 2030 would require an additional 10,000 wind turbines to be built. Given that the government now knows the potential adverse health effects of wind turbines and bearing in mind the potential future liability arising from that knowledge, does the minister acknowledge that the government must now act. (Time expired)

Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Assistant Minister for Education and Training):  As Senator Day and all senators would be aware, the parliament recently passed the revised renewable energy target. The current large-scale target is 33,000 gigawatt hours, which will, by 2020, see around 23 per cent, it is estimated, of renewable energy generated in Australia. It is remarkable, though, that despite having agreed to this legislation and supported the compromise, as Senator Day rightly highlights, the Australian Labor Party now proposes a 50 per cent target. Estimates are that Labor’s 50 per cent target could saddle Australians with about $85 billion of additional costs. When challenged on this, what does the Labor Party say? They say, ‘We don’t know, because we have not done any modelling, we have not done any assessment and we have not done any analysis.’

Senator Abetz:  Oh, yes, they have.

Senator BIRMINGHAM:  You are right, Senator Abetz; in relation to the carbon tax costs, which are even greater in terms of what Labor are seeking to bring back—and they know very clearly that the expense to Australians of that carbon tax will be very, very dear indeed. (Time expired)

Senator DAY (South Australia):  Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. The government has directed the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in newer renewable technologies. The Australian Financial Review reported last month that the CEFC is fighting the directive and has sought legal advice. What exactly has the CEFC been directed to do? What will be the real effect? What confidence does the government have that the CEFC will obey that directive?

Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Assistant Minister for Education and Training):  I have some information in that regard. Matters of the CEFC are rightly matters for the Minister for Finance, but I am advised that the government has been working constructively with the CEFC. Under section 64 of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Act, the Minister for Finance and the Treasurer can issue an investment mandate to the board to provide direction on the performance of the CEFC’s investment functions. These responsible ministers must consult with the CEFC board on that investment mandate and, once finalised, the investment mandate is tabled in parliament. A consultation process is underway with the CEFC. The government will not pre-empt the outcome of this process, but our expectation is that the CEFC’s focus will be on its original policy intent when the CEFC was established, so that it is investing in innovative clean energy proposals and technologies rather than more mature technologies, which can be financed by mainstream lenders.

Hansard, 12 August 2015: available here.

Senator Bob Day

Senator Bob Day: it ain’t over yet, not by a long-shot.

 ****

Adding to STT’s sense of delight about Bob Day’s well-reasoned tenacity, was the fact that Committee Chair, John Madigan hasn’t let up, either. Here’s video of his speech in the Senate – delivered a little later that same day [Hansard – transcript follows].

****

****

SENATOR MADIGAN (Victoria): The government thinks we may be able to reduce emissions by up to 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. They think this commitment balances Australia’s environmental and economic responsibilities. They say we can achieve the target through low-cost abatement while still being able to maintain strong economic and jobs growth. Let us hope so.

The Labor Party endorsed the Climate Change Authority’s target of 40 to 60 per cent at their national conference recently. The opposition had already flagged its obedience to the wind industry and union owned super funds when it announced its hypothetical, uncosted ‘aspirational’ 50 per cent renewable energy target thought bubble.

One of the objectives of the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 is to ‘to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases in the electricity sector’. The RET is already costing electricity consumers in the order of up to $45 million. The RET is a rising stealth tax on electricity which relies on the premise that electricity created from renewable energy infrastructure will reduce emissions.

Are modern-day wind turbines capable of reducing emissions and, if so, at what social, economic and environmental cost? We know all too well the divisive social impact wind farms have on rural communities. The economic benefits of wind turbines flow to offshore, subsidy-hungry wind farm operators. And environmentally? It is not possible to build, operate or maintain a wind turbine without a reliance on fossil fuels. In 2012 the founder of the Greens, Dr James Lovelock, described wind turbines as monuments to a failed society. He said:

I am an environmentalist and founder member of the Greens but I bow my head in shame at the thought that our original good intentions should have been so misunderstood … We never intended a fundamentalist Green movement that rejected all energy sources other than renewable, nor did we expect the Greens to cast aside our priceless ecological heritage because of their failure to understand that the needs of the Earth are not separable from human needs.

Back in 2004 Dr Lovelock told Australia’s 60 Minutes:

At the best, wind power cannot provide more than a tiny fraction of the energy needs of civilisation. It’s a nice idea. It looks good. It’s showy. I think it’s one of those things politicians like because it can be seen that they’re doing something. But in practice, it’s not really a useful remedy.

Those in the chamber who want an emissions target higher than the government’s are the same senators who mindlessly advocate for the installation of environmentally destructive, fossil fuel dependent, industrial wind turbines.

These senators seem happy to burden Australian families, farmers, manufacturers, food processors and businesses with the extra financial pressures that will come with increased emissions reduction costs. They threaten Australia’s competitiveness. Perhaps, too, they just want to look good, showy and like they are doing something.

Why don’t those who are howling with selective moral outrage who want to commit this country to an irresponsibly higher emissions target and potentially put Australia’s social and economic prosperity at further risk do us all a favour?

Don’t get in a dirty, polluting Comcar to travel to and from the airport. Don’t get on a fossil fuel dependent flight to Canberra when parliament sits 20 weeks a year. Think of all those emissions you will be saving.

Do your bit to supplement what Senator Siewert says is the Abbott government’s week and dangerous carbon pollution reduction target and stay at home. Lead by example and perform your Senate duties, low emissions style by skype or teleconference.

Make some use of the recklessly expensive NBN. Better still, make sure your computer is only powered by electricity that is created by wind turbines. At least that way, we are only likely to hear from you 30 per cent of the time.

Hansard, 12 August 2015: available here.

John Madigan

John Madigan: ‘tenacity’ be thy name.

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.

Comments

  1. Jackie Rovenksy says:

    Senator Madigan is an explosive speaker in the Senate, he has a target and ensures he hits it each time.

    Maybe one day those he has in his sights will come to realise they have no avenue of escape except to capitulate and accept they are wrong to try and stand against the tide of truth.

    Senator Day is not afraid to ask the questions that are needed to uncover the truth. The CEFC are not there to ask who wants the money and give it to the one with the loudest cry and biggest toys, they are there to spend our money in the best way they can for OUR benefit.

    Once they accept that then maybe we can get on with providing funds to those who may have a chance of providing a better form of renewable energy than giant stakes thrust into the earth can.

    At present there is no technology which can produce renewable energy at a level and consistency that will satisfy our needs, so those in Parliament who seek to keep funding a lost cause accept the inevitable and understand we need a mixed source of energy production and we don’t need anymore of these things scaring our beautiful country and damaging our wonderful hard working rural families.

  2. mid north frost pocket says:

    Well done Senators Madigan and Day

    And as for the GREENS, some more from their Founder Dr James Lovelock.

    From :”Wind power is just a gesture”
    February 3rd, 2004
    http://ecolo.org/lovelock/lovelock-wind-power.html

    Dr Lovelock “waves away the argument that wind is a natural form of energy. “Lots of things are good in nature – like motherhood – but it can be an absolute menace in certain circumstances,” he says.

    “Dr Lovelock believes we face devastating consequences from climate change and that putting up a few wind turbines will not address the problem.

    “He cites the example of the Danes, who have found turbines will only work with conventional power stations to support them when there is no wind.

    ” As such power stations cannot be fired up at will, they have to run constantly, which defeats the “green” objective.

    “Dr Lovelock cannot emphasise enough how anxious he feels that time is running out to address the issue of climate change. “Windfarms won’t cut it at all,” he said. “It’s better than doing nothing, but it’s absurd, just gestures. Time is of the essence.”

    Bet he thinks Christine Milne and Richard Di Natale have been doing a great job saving the planet – NOT!

    Like sheep the GREENS have gone astray.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: