💧simon holmes à court Profile picture
Oct 15, 2021 8 tweets 4 min read Read on X
i'm really cross about gov't propaganda claiming australia "has made good progress in reducing #emissions".

[i added the emojis because the taxpayer funded ad is just so misleading]

everybody knows @AngusTaylorMP & team habitually lie to us, but do you know *how*? 🧵 #auspol
the main source of carbon emissions, and therefore global heating, is burning #FossilFuels — and we've done next to nothing to wean ourselves off them.

putting land management aside for a sec, over the last 15 years (since FY2005) australia's emissions have dropped by only 2.9%.
sure, we've made decent progress reducing electricity emissions (by replacing coal with renewables), but it's largely been undone by increases in "stationary energy" emissions (largely gas used for heating) and "fugitive emissions" (methane leaked by coal & gas companies).
hang on… but the gov't says emissions are down 20%, not ~2.9%. what's the discrepancy?

well, we also have emissions from our land management — mostly due to land clearing.

we _were_ clearing a lot, but strict regulations slowed it right down around about a decade ago.
if we count less land clearing as emissions reduction*, and offset that against our shitty progress on emissions elsewhere, it makes us look less bad.

this is how the gov't says emissions fell by 20% over 15 years.

*don't get me wrong, it's good we're not clearing as much.
looking at the change in each sector since 2005, land management and electricity emissions are down (as discussed).

agriculture's down due to drought, transport's down due to covid.

…but other than shutting a few coal power stations, we *haven't* been transforming the economy.
…we stopped the most egregious land clearing, but you can't stop something that's already stopped — so we can't hide behind that again.

the govt's own projections (issued dec 2020) have us reducing emissions by just 3% over this decade.
i designed this tool (built by friend & data viz legend @chienleng) basically to tell this story. it's very fresh, so please excuse the rough edges, and have a play:

(instructions & more info coming soon.)
opennem.org.au/emissions/au/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with 💧simon holmes à court

💧simon holmes à court Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @simonahac

May 15
i attended the ‘navigating nuclear’ conference on monday in sydney.

up front: there were some high quality presentations — on issues such as health impacts, safety culture, regulatory systems. Image
…but sadly there was also some abject nonsense…
the presentation below argued that we have two options:

1. build a complex grid of wind, solar, hydro, hydrogen, batteries, pumped hydro, transmission and EVs.

2. just build nuclear and use existing powerlines.

…apparently #2 is the way to go. 🙄 Image
Read 10 tweets
Mar 21
⚛️ @abcnews's recent #FactCheck made a classic rookie error in calculating that the latest US nukes had "build times of 10.1 and 10.4 years".

depending how you count it, it took somewhere between 13.9 years and ~19 years to build them.

easy mistake to make.

let me explain… 🧵
ABC's analysis assumes the build time is the elapsed period between "construction start" and "grid connection" dates.

in the real world, a nuclear power building project begins years before "construction start" and often finishes months after "grid connection".
"construction start" is defined by the IAEA as the "the date when first major placing of concrete for the base mat of the reactor building is made."

"grid connection" is when "the plant is first connected to the electrical grid for the supply of power."

pris.iaea.org/PRIS/Glossary.…
Read 18 tweets
Mar 13
☢️beware #nuclear porkies #2 🤥

australians🇦🇺: you're going to hear lots about ontario🇨🇦, which does have a very clean grid and cheap retail power.

but you should know 🧵

1. average age of ontario's nuclear fleet is 40 years. all government owned, but ~half privately operated. Image
2. the current nuclear price (as determined by the ontario energy board) from this old fleet is CAD 10.1¢/kWh which is the same as A$113/MWh.



ontario's proposed new nuclear power stations will cost much more…oeb.ca/sites/default/…
3a. a 2018 canadian gov't + industry report estimated cost of power from SMRs would have a mid-point of CAD$163/MWh, or CAD$215/MWh with a 3% cost overrun.

in 2024A$, this range is A$220 – A$290/MWh.



generally, SMR estimates have increased since.smrroadmap.ca/wp-content/upl…
Read 7 tweets
Mar 9
⚛️ why #nuclear power is a distraction for australia

if implemented, the #coalition's plan would see:
• increased gas & coal usage
• increased cost
• increased emissions
• higher chance of blackouts

read on to find out why… 🧵 Image
firstly, let me say i have a deep interest in nuclear.

i've visited multiple nuclear plants, met with companies planning to build SMRs and nuclear VCs, taken a nuclear course at @MIT and closely watched the sector for years.

i encourage the use of nuclear where it makes sense. Image
some context: nuclear has had a long history of nothing in australia, including the start of construction in jervis bay (promptly cancelled by a liberal PM) and a federal ban (under a liberal PM).

important to note there are also state bans, including in NSW, VIC & QLD. Image
Read 30 tweets
Feb 4
🤓 an interesting thing about the govt's proposed 'new vehicle efficiency standard' (NVES) is how they're consulting.

they've put 3 options on the table, and are wanting to hear the public's views.

but first, a little 🧵 about the NVES:
we've been talking about 🚗⛽️ efficiency standards since at least 2008!

over 85% of cars sold worldwide are covered by a new vehicle efficiency standard, but not here!

russia & australia: the only developed countries without 🚗⛽️ efficiency standards.


Image
…as a result, passenger cars in australia are, on average, 20% less efficient than passenger cars in the US.

lower efficiency cars mean we buy more petrol…

which means we waste a lot of money 💸 on fuel, with higher pollution per km travelled.

🚗◾️◾️▪️▪️
Read 15 tweets
Jan 3
i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #Victoria look like: Image
…then i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #NSW look like: Image
…then i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #Queensland look like: Image
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(