Look to Australia if you want to see how these energy policies work out in the long run.

Energy is big money. Anything that disrupts the status quo is immediately vilified. It got to the point that our major party at the time lead a “gas fired” green energy policy.

They got voted out, the new guys implemented a subsidised home battery policy. In the space of a year it has destroyed the economics of a carbon fuelled grid. All the economics pointing to renewables being the way forward were proven correct.

Everyone gets their back scratched. If you’re a consumer and you invested, you have a massively discounted personal power station that generates you money. If you operate the grid, your transmission costs and peak transmission costs went down. General consumer prices went down because of a reduction in peak electricity use driving up retail costs. Everyone in won.

Except big gas, who cannot turn a profit on a renewable success story. Don’t let rhetoric become your reality.

It's absurd how the propaganda against green energy on certain political spectrums essentially turned into, "It's all money/cash grab for green energy companies!"

As if the established industry has no incentive in the opposite direction? Everyone is going to act in their best interests in this system, that's how it's designed, the whole point of government is to mediate the system in the best interests of the whole.

> Except big gas, who cannot turn a profit on a renewable success story.

If only.

Chevron’s Gorgon project will be ongoing for decades and making money hand over fist flogging LNG out of Australia to overseas customers.

It'll be a massive source of previously sequestered CO2 and claimed to be "the largest CO2 sequestration project on the planet* .. with the minor catch of (re-) stashing away a very very tiny portion of the CO2 released. Something, something, not let it out in the first place?

Still, could be worse, at least they're not planning on fracking the Kimberley.

Oh, wait: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh9IkUUgaww

RE " Everyone Wins "

Well the tax payer, would be paying the 30% subsidy for Home Battery deployments, which I understand is severeral $Billion 8.5 AU at present.

One group of loosers will be people who can not afford to participate in this program. It would seem another group would be users who cannot shift their electrity demands from peak times when electricty will become quite expensive.

RE "....Look to Australia if you want to see how these energy policies work out in the long run......"

The timeline is several years

> General consumer prices went down

What now?

Where in Australia have consumer prices gone down?

> because of a reduction in peak electricity use driving up retail costs

I don’t understand what you’re trying to day here.

[flagged]