An open thread, where at your weekend leisure, you can discuss anything you like.
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo was an Australian group blog which discussed politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
Earthquake in Burma.
I was just reflecting today on how completely FLEECED I feel by every formerly state-owned, now privatised entity Ive ever encountered.
What a crapping disaster that whole ideological turn was.
Must check on the quake, in a mo.
Lefty E, watching Lateline tonight, I was left wondering about how the NSW right was so anal about this privatisation thing, even after being told by the public till it was blue in its face, long and often, that they wanted them to drop that and get on with some thing substantial, like getting public transport working better.
yep, neoliberalism IS a crapping disaster.
Has anyone any links to news/ citizen blogs coming out of either Cote d’Ivoir or Bahrain?
Official/establisment news seems to have died & my searches are finding nothing.
Minority government falls to no-confidence motion.
The Canadian conservative minority government has lost a motion of no confidence 145-156. An election will be held in early May. This will almost certainly see a new Conservative government, the only question is whether or not they can get a majority.
Stephen Harper is very similiar to John Howard, in both his moral sliminess, and his tremendous tactical nous. His government is at near record high approval ratings since he first became Prime Minister in 2006.
On a more agreeable note, there’s a special pleasure for a homesick Australian to be watching Friday Night Football so far from home. A terrible game though, I don’t think Geelong or St. Kilda will do very well this year based on this showing.
Nonsense Scott, they are two top sides.
Matches between top sides are not always tidy.
As for Burma/Myanmar, the body bags are well and truly out.
G and StK both played well to coaches’ instructions.
Blame Malthouse for evolving a successful strategy based on multi-layered defence which destroyed Geelong’s attacking, fluent, risk-taking strategy.
The game evolves one more time and all teams must find a way to adapt.
Last night at the G we saw attempts at that adaptation from two very good sides.
Unfortunately I’m only able to watch one game a week so I’m not really up-to-date with the evolution of football-I think TSN (who have the AFL rights in Canada) showed four Collingwood games last year and two of them were grand finals.
But come on, last night’s game had way too many unforced errors. A professional footballer has to be able to dispose of the ball to his team-mate, not to the grass, or worse, to the opposition.
Name a professional player who never makes a disposal error.
The weather was wet and windy. It was the first game of the season. Geelong, at least, is adapting to a game plan that is antithetical to their historically successful game plan of the last five years. Some old cats are learning new tricks.
A little perspective would be in order.
You guys are soft. I hope and expect James Hird demands more of Essendon.
Hird can demand until he is blue in the face. After Gold Coast and Brisbane, Essendon has the weakest list in the AFL.
Hird can therefore demand that Essendon rise to achieve the level of mediocrity that ten years of list mismanagement and poor football administration can allow.
A peculiar thing happened yesterday here at home on which I would appreciate the collective wisdom of LP.
I saw a thin arc of electricity flashing for half a second between my phone and my modem, both of which are on top of my computer. Cp,[uter works fine as does modem and phone. {resumably everything on and around my computer desk is not going to go up in flames.
So, what happened, why and is it dangerous, apart from the phone being too close to the modem? Will it happen again?
Ah, Friday afternoon excitement!
Possibly static electricity. What were the weather conditions at the time?
Out of prudence, I’d be inclined to separate the appliances of which you write rather than having them stacked together in a pile.
You might want to keep them all away from any curtains too, Paul.
Thanks, guys. They’re away from curtains and I have put them further apart. Will just not have to stack any paper, exercise books, manuscript photocopies etc near them.
Weather was fine, partly cloudy, partly blue sky.
Much appreciated. I was getting a bit worried.
It wasn’t a very enjoyable game to watch last night. Especially as I’m a Saints supporter.
On another sporting note: Australia currently has the two best racehorses in the world as rated by the international handicappers who do this stuff. They’re So You Think and Black Caviar. So You Think has been sold to Irish interests for reputedly $40million and is off to conquer the rest of the world this Northern Hemisphere summer. He’s the handsomest horse I’ve ever seen.
Paul Walter and Katz must have been watching a different game from the one I saw. The game was riddled with errors, and the skills of Bartel, Goddard, Riewoldt and newbie Duncan put the lie to the weather being the problem.
St Kilda have fiddled around on the backline for 3 years now and show no signs of changing. Geelong did the same last night. Collingwood’s strategy is to defend then attack. Those two last night failed dismally to attempt the second part of the strategy.
Peter Hartcher opines that Abbott’s rabidity a deliberate strategy to intimidate the parliament;
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/time-for-a-tea-break-tony-20110325-1ca0c.html
All opponents of Collingwood have to learn how to transition the ball through the Collingwood defence before they can commit themselves to attack.
This process will take time and much trial and error.
Geelong simply cannot afford to continue to play their old game-plan, which was all attack. Moreover, they were the slickest movers of the ball in the history of the game. Now they have to learn to adapt to new challenges. And evidently they are learning. Does Anisthenes IV think that the Geelong players have lost the ability to handle the ball cleanly? Bartel is a renowned mud runner. Duncan was impressive. He too rose above the conditions.
St Kilda based their success on strangling their opponents. They have never been big scorers, despite the presence of Riewoldt. And in any case Riewoldt coughed the ball up frequently, and Goddard wasn’t particularly impressive, so Anisthenes IV must have been watching another “another game”.
I’m quietly pleased Australia got eliminated from the World Cup and pleased NZ made it through … That Vettori fellow is an admirable fellow in all the ways that Ponting is not.
Pending régime change in Yemen.
Katz: “All opponents of Collingwood have to learn how to transition the ball through the Collingwood defence before they can commit themselves to attack.”
‘Transitioning’ the ball through a defence IS attacking, Katz, Transitioning the ball through their own defence is what has cost St Kilda a couple of premierships in the past two years. ‘Transitioning’ the ball through the opposition’s attack is what won Geelong a couple. What Geelong needs to do is develop a forward line that matches the Collingwood forward line’s determination to keep the ball in the forward area.
Ah, the delights of a cool night and warm bedclothes. My inner dormouse reasserted herself with a vengeance for eleven glorious hours. Which reminds me of an old, old verse about sleep:
“Angered by repeated releases of secretly filmed videos claiming to show the mistreatment of farm animals, Iowa’s agriculture industry is pushing legislation that would make it illegal for animal rights activists to produce and distribute such images.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ag-industry-iowa-lawmakers-try-to-limit-undercover-videos-say-effort-doesnt-protect-animals/2011/03/14/ABT53gU_story.html
That’s an interesting article, Tyro Rex. But, I can’t believe that either Oakeshott, Windsor, Wilkie or Bandt will change sides because Abbott’s sturm und drang panics them into it. I would bet they find his latest performances repugnant. Windsor and Oakeshott have already shown they have little respect for the man. I also bet that Gillard is spending large amounts of time and many cups of tea keeping the indys sweet.
140th anniversary of the Paris Commune today.
A lot of water has flowed under a lot of bridges in 140 years …..
Committing yourself to attack isn’t the same as attacking. It’s what you have to do to stop the ball rebounding from a rash, inaccurate or irresolute attack.
And I suppose the ‘Collingwood defence’ isn’t the same as their backline either. Ah well… live and learn.
Depends on what you mean by “backline” AIV. It may have slipped your notice that sometimes the whole team is behind the centreline.
Traditionally, however, “backline” refers to the 6 players BPs (x2), FB, FBF (x2), CHB.
Are you using “backline” interchangeably with “defence”, you quaint old nostalgic, you?
Nostalgic, yes. Old, approaching. Quaint, heh heh. It may have slipped your notice that defence is any time the opposition has the ball, and attack is any time we have it. But he mighty saints kicking from one half back flank to a back pocket to a wing and back to a half back flank ad tedium (it ought to be a phrase) doesn’t constitute an attack in my quaint, old, nostalgic view.
And because St Kilda persist in it, they continue to lose big games with a list of players second to none.
Maybe it’s the tactics they’re using?
I’m chuffed to read that you agree with me that “defence” isn’t the same thing as the “backline”.
I agree with your assessment of the Saints’ methodology. I believe it stems from the fact that Lyon acknowledges in his own mind that their small forwards aren’t up to snuff. If Riewoldt drops the mark and if Kosi happens to get his hands anywhere near the ball, Milne et al cannot work well in heavy traffic. But on the other hand, their midfield leg speed is insufficient to get the ball behind the opposition’s defence. This is what Geelong was very good at until Collingwood showed the footy world how to stop it.
Given that, the only alternative is East/West keepings-off.
AFL is something other than a 36 man all-in brawl?
It can be that TR, but the team that persists in that behaviour longer than its opponent will always lose.
AFL, like every other game in the universe, is indeed incomprehensible to anyone who’s never bothered to learn the rules. It’s a bit like bagging the Harry Potter books when one hasn’t actually read any of them.
Yes, there are definite advantages to never having given birth. Perhaps she stayed Deliberately Barren in preparation for this very moment.
Very true Pavlov. But Harry Potter was a fine attacking Seeker!
It may be part of the Goddess’ great, cosmic plan PC.
How delusional are Red Kerry and boldness Hawker? This is the best comedy ever.
Prosper Australia’s call for a first home buyers’ strike, launched on March 15, has risen to No.6 in the Campaign Ideas Forum at GetUp! – http://is.gd/FNiegF .
Have been with friends watching the NSW ALP’s funeral. Kristina Keneally gave a truly great concession speech. The pity of it is that the ALP has lost most of its deadwood in the last year or so but is unlikely to be re-elected for at least two terms.
Am hoping that the 20% of the populations of safe Liberal seats who voted Green have all done so in the Upper House, but unfortunately the swings are such that O’Farrell might well end up with a rubber stamp.
It’s going to be interesting to see if the Conservatives can restrain themselves, given that the electorate booted Labor over infrastructure issues. You can’t provide infrastructure if you retrench everyone for the sake of Small Government (a phrase I didn’t hear in this campaign!).
Next spot to watch: how many heads roll in Transport (I hope quite a lot) under Berejiklian. And I wonder if Michael Coutts-Trotter might take early retirement from Education.
I’ve travelled the world (well, lived in two countries besides Australia) and been witness, in addition, to NZ and SA rugby commentary, and I have to say that there is nothing in sports commentary anywhere on earth that compares to commentary on AFL.
Something about AFL really does bring out a superior level of analytical skill, wit, and English skill than any other sport.
Sg – you may be right, but the hurdle is CLR James: West Indian cricket writer and Marxist theorist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._L._R._James
“C. L. R. James is widely known as a writer on cricket, especially for his autobiographical 1963 book, Beyond a Boundary. This is considered the seminal work on the game, and is often named as the best single book on cricket (or even the best book on any sport) ever written.”
dont blame me, I voted for Pemulwuy.
I think SG is referring to Dennis Cometti, the Golden Tonsils of the West. Take him away, and most AFL broadcasts are fairly bland.
CLR James was a writer, not a broadcaster, which I think is what SG was referring to. He was a great writer, and I think cricket brings out the best in sports writing. No book comes close to ‘Beyond a boundary’, but there’s plenty of other fine writers- Benaud in his writing days, Cardus, Jack Fingleton, O’Reilly, and the modern English school, Scyld Berry and Michael Atherton. Australia has some good ones too, Malcolm Knox and Gideon Haigh are very fine wordsmiths as well.
I’d like to suggest Warrick Hadfield as a great sports wordsmith. His daily summaries on ‘Breakfast’ (RN) are a delight.
SG is correct. He isn’t just referring to the professional commentariat, if I read him correctly. Clearly professional wordsmiths can write entertainingly and engagingly about almost anything. And as its detractors are wont to remind us, AFL is a highly local game played by a vanishingly small number of people by comparison with many major games. The pool of professional writer talent is correspondingly small.
No, I believe that SG is also talking about non-professional comment.
Where AFL is followed the game engages a wider and deeper level of interest than any other sport. This diversity of interest excites a fascinating diversity of insight, which is often reflected in professional commentary.
There are at least two causes of this condition:
1. The unique history of Melbourne and Victoria, too complex to discuss in a blog comment.
2. The intrinsic plasticity and complexity of the game itself, which generate methods and outcomes analogous to the dynamism of the history of warfare.
Commentary driven by these factors is therefore quite likely to have a “superior level of analytical skill, wit, and English skill”.
I’m interested in the views here on this:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/backlash-as-god-forced-into-schools-20110326-1cb7c.html
I loathe the force-feeding of superstition to children in state schools but is this all a huge fuss over nothing?
I was a confirmed atheist by the time I was 8 thanks to this nonsense and spent my RI classes reading Jules Verne books at the back of the class (my parents copped so much grief it wasn’t funny!)
Can’t parents just take the attitude mine did and tell their kids to take a good book in to occupy them (it is only 30 minutes a week after all!) or is the principle important enough to fight it tooth-and-nail.
(My primary school time was 1969-75 btw.)
Vidtoria points the way to what will happen in NSW now that the Uglies are in.
I presume you think the new NSW govt will try and get rid of the ‘ethics’ classes they’ve been offering as an alternative up there then? One of the best ideas I’ve heard in education in recent years.
Dave C @ 47: My primary school years were similar to yours, and I too have been an athiest from about the age of 7 or 8. Maybe thats the best service Religious Instruction (I’m from QLD) could possibly done for me.
Dennis Cometti: a sampler.
(The year Ben Cousins was stopped by the cops on the road and ran away from his car, leaving his girlfriend in it to fend for herself): “Cousins, runs away from Carr … not the first time we’ve seen that this season”
“Bell bringing the ball out of the back line…..looking for wide runners…..passes to Walker…a contradiction in terms, really”
“Barlow to Bateman,the Hawks are attacking alphabetically”
“The Magpies ought to be kicking themselves right now, but with their luck, they’d probably miss.”
“Kevin Sheedy, who was coaching Essendon 14 years before Adelaide was founded. The team, not the city.”
(Anthony Rock hard on the heels of player close to the MCG fence…): “Nasty situation, he’s caught between A. Rock and a hard place.”
On Melbourne’s Adam Yze: “A terrific player . . . terrible scrabble hand.”
“Woods to Lake, sounds idyllic.”
“Looks like it’s back to the drawing board….. something the inventors of the drawing board didn’t have the luxury of.”
On former Magpie, Crow and now Cat, Brenton Sanderson: “He goes much better as a mammal.”
Cometti is incredibly cool.
Duncan @ 25, as you would know better than most, treating farm animals decently would increase the cost of our food (at least in the short term, and let’s face it, that’s all agribusiness cares about). It would, of course, increase its quality as well.
Liberals promised too keep ethics classes in NSW SMH
harleymc @4
Global Voices has extensive coverage of the blogosphere including Cote d’Ivoir and Bahrain.
Background Briefing on R.N., on the mining tax, was Aunty at her best this very morning. Laura Tingle as a bonus makes this not to be missed radio, folks.
Here is the link…
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2011/3172676.htm
Katz is correct, I’m not just talking about the professional commentariat, the kinds of conversations you hear amongst normal AFL fans are quite mind-bogglingly sophisticated compared to other sports. I do also love me some Dennis Commetti though.
Australian rugby commentators are also a notch above the rest, in my opinion, though NZ commentators can be pretty funny too. Cricket I can’t comment on – can’t stay awake in front of it long enough to tell.
“Backlash as God forced into schools”…
and do not miss the cartoon.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/backlash-as-god-forced-into-schools-20110326-1cb7c.html
Correct me if I am wrong here, but is it not about a year since Obama’s Health Care Act was passed?
Can anyone tell me how many Grandma’s have died as a result of this – as promised by the Republicans?
Death panels set up yet?
Perhaps the Australian might be preparing for some coverage of the disintegration of US society as was predicted?
Ya see, comments like #59 are the reason I’m always harping that you don’t… (arrgh, never mind).
All right, one last try. Here’s a few things to remember:
– the Obamacare law is structured to be implemented gradually, because it’s so complicated. Full implementation will not be in (ostensible) effect til 2014. So it effectively doesn’t “exist” in the day to day world at the moment, rendering the snark @ #59 immaterial, uninformed, and irrelevant.
– the law is at the moment being seriously challenged in the Federal courts as to its constitutionality. So far, 26 states — a majority of the states, that is — have sued the Administration to block implementation of the law. To date at least one federal judge from a high circuit has ruled it unconstitutional and has issued what is effectively a cease-and-desist order, which the Administration has thus far defied, hoping to see it overturned on appeal (nevertheless, defiance of a federal judge is defiance of a federal judge — you don’t get to ignore a court order because you feel like it). The matter will almost certainly wind up in front of the Supreme Court.
– in the meantime, something like 1000 waivers (granting exemptions from compliance with various aspects of the law) have been granted by the Administration to certain large well-connected groups, creating an appearance at least (and probably a reality) of political favoritism — in other words, equality before the law has already gone out the window, creating (I would think, logically at least, but haven’t yet seen the legal reasoning) another broad avenue for legal challenge. If the law is so groovy, why the need for waivers?
– in other words, already we see evidence that as regards practical implementation, there will be politically favored and disfavored classes when it comes to government allocation of health-care resources; in other words Barack (“just take the pain pill” — viz., ‘just go ahead and die already, instead of demanding expensive care’) Obama and his minions will make decisions regarding withholding care from politically disfavored classes, in order to extend it to politically favored classes. We see it already in the shenanigans involving Medicare funding under the law. In other words, a death panel.
Now maybe you can explain something to me: Did Julia Gillard use her dismissal powers to make Bob Hawke provide a Pacific Solution to the NBN bill, so that the Greens/One Nation coalition can get Centrelink to handle the super?
“Obama and his minions will make decisions regarding withholding care from politically disfavored classes, in order to extend it to politically favored classes.”
I find it hard to believe that you believe that. So like the ravings of a madman.
Even if I’m giving you too much credit, and you do believe it, and I grant for the sake of argument that you are correct: how would you compare it with a situation where such “decisions” are made de facto by simple financial capacity to pay for treatment?
If not much better, it’s hardly worse.
Even the most dewy-eyed proponent of the welfare state has to agree with Japerz that Obamacare is a dog’s breakfast.
This fiasco is guaranteed to turn Americans away from real social democracy.
Oh, I certainly agree it’s a dog’s breakfast.
For all its faults, living with our healthcare system makes it pretty easy to spot shitty ones, and be left wondering how it happens in a modern democracy.
In Australia it took Whitlam, a crash through or crash visionary, and the genius of the double dissolution provisions of the Australian Constitution.
So, no change then.
I always thought Obama was intent on maintaining the status quo.
#65 and 66 — Well, momentarily witty at least; but also, like some wag once put it, deeply shallow.
#61 — This one though, I’m afraid, is just shallowly shallow.
No, it’s more like that time when Halliburton filibustered the Bridge To Nowhere, ensuring that the KKK/ACORN alliance would bailout their earmarks, so that the huge bonuses would trickle down to the NRA.
Well, j_p_z, even if what you wrote were absolutely correct, the point is that if any political side wishes to make some pretty sensational claims about an opposing side’s policies, (and most people would think that the “Obama lies, Grandma dies” would come under the category of sensational), then you can’t switch back to reason and good argument when it suits. The Republicans used shock/horror and sensationalism to make their points. Fine. Just why you would then expect an electorate that apparently is going to respond to shock/horror sensationalism to then switch to consideration of rational argument is beyond me. Why should a party that uses shock horror to make its arguments think it all terribly unjust if those arguments are returned in the same way? Sounds a bit sooky to me.
And that is even if what you wrote was absolutely correct. I am sure you know, and know the rest of us know, where you have fudged and slurred your way through some of the difficult passages in your response.
Put another way, Tony Abbott is making a big thing of the carbon tax. If it comes in, and the actual net effect on people is just ho hum – expect the ALP to smack him over the head with it. If you think that any side of politics can make sensational claims about policy, and then not get called on it in the terms in which they presented it, then I suggest respectfully that you re-think.
“I am sure you know, and know the rest of us know, where you have fudged and slurred your way through some of the difficult passages in your response.”
Point it out, dude. Point away, professor. I’ll wait.
The rest of your argument is childish and ridiculous. Actually, the whole of your argument is childish and ridiculous, which isn’t the least bit surprising, given its provenance. For example,
“Just why you would then expect an electorate that apparently is going to respond to shock/horror sensationalism…”
Objection. Calls for speculation. Calls for imputation of motive. Calls for condescension. Denies the existence of Paul Ryan. Uses the weasel word “apparently,” when the speaker is not, and has not been, a direct observer nor a participant on the scene, nor a voter whose motives can be explained at personal length. Basically, intellectual hearsay from first to last.
JUSTICE TWINFEET: Sustained on all counts. And I’m going to add a few objections myself, just to be a bit of a pip, if you don’t mind.
But at least you can attempt to defend the “fudged and slurred” part… well, at least you can try. If you’re “sure”, and the “rest of us” (whoever “us” turns out to be) “know,” then I’m sure that won’t be a problem for a fella who couldn’t get Fact One (2011 vs. 2014) straight.
Go on, this’ll be fun.
btw, the list of waivers that I could find with minimal and primitive Google-fu stands somewhere around 730, not literally 1000, but then again that information is old. But I guess you could ride the “NOT literally 1000 as was claimed!” horse if you’d care to. It’s about all you’ll have.
If you like, I suppose, you could go do the hard yards research-wise and report back to me exactly how many of those 729 are Obama/Dems donors, and that might aid your cause; a quick over-glance revealed to me a lot of union locals, but, you know… get to work, Woodward Bernstein, and prove me wrong.
Well j_p_z your whole post is a fudge.
You see, what you are doing is trying to obscure the whole point by indulging in furious arm waving and nit picking on issues I did not even bring up. That is what I call fudging.
If you go to my original post, I pointed to the ‘death panels’ and the ‘Obama lies – grandma dies’ statements. Any death panels? Any dead grannies?
A further great big fudge is that in any system which has any form of cost control, there is going to be the need for some sort of decision making process (call it a panel if you like) of whether or not someone is going to get a particular expensive medicine or procedure – we do it here. In the US, for example, some medical insurers have those controls, and guess what, panels of doctors and lawyers who determine what medications and procedures are covered. So, the use of the term ‘death panels’ (I think it was Palin) was patently a political term that conveniently ignored (I think fudged is a fair term) the fact that in the present system, similar processes are used. It was a political fudge, and your defence of it in your response was similarly a fudge. Your response may have been strictly correct in the narrowest of senses, but by ignoring the fact that existing insurance companies have similar controls, glossed over, fudged, avoided the political point – which was the main/only point of the ‘death panels’ message of the Republicans.
Similarly, trying to focus on the minutiae of the legalities, when the whole issue is one of broad political ideology is also a fudge. Arm waving and obfuscation is what you are up to. What your response has illustrated is that the Republicans came up with a broad crude sensational political headline, but which they figured they could defend on the legal minutiae if someone called them on it. This is like the banks with their one liner credit card offers to suck people in, followed by a booklet of small type legal mumbo jumbo to enable them to weasel out of whatever it is they wish to.
Fudge.
In case anyone’s interested (or has comparative data, partic from Melbourne conditions):
Stats for the first full day of having the new 1.5kw solar system switched on at Keating Towers:
5.5 kw solar power produced,
with 4.4kw delivered to grid,
3.8 kw used from grid (overnight).
In other words, we covered our own daily use, and delivered a net 0.6kw back to the grid.
Plus, “Obamacare” might be a dog’s breakfast, but that’s not Obama or his party’s fault – that’s what it looks like after it’s been through 1645126 rounds of Republican appeasement.
I’m interested Lefty E. Those figures are most encouraging.
We expect to have our 1.5kw system installed in a couple of weeks. Our corrugated iron roof is now painted with heat reflective paint and is ready to go.
I notice how Green Loans are pilloried by one and all but, in our case, the money has been put to very good use with already big drops in our water, gas and electricity consumption. The 402kw a year fridge and 182kw washing machine have been critical in the energy use decline.
Solar energy in Australia is such a no brainer that you’d be forgiven for thinking that quite a few powerful vested interests have exerted undue influence on energy policy.
Couldn’t happen here of course.
Cool Joe2, let me know how your numbers go. You’ll probably get obsessed with reading your new smart meter for a while. You’re dead right that the fridge, washer I(and insulation for that matter) are key to making it pay.
Adrian, there’s been some pretty persuasive arguments made (here at LP, by Rob Merkel and others) which argue that as an overall policy to reduce Australian emissions, home solar subsidies aren’t really the top shelf investments.
However, solar plants seem more efficient (and likely to become even more so), so your wider point is sound.
The other point Id make is not so much to disagree with Rob et al (since I dont): but to note that the home solar equation is much broader than ‘tonne of reductions per govt buck’: home solar links people in to the whole equation in a more politically mobilising and informed way; it also progressively reduces the size of any “base load” that we’ll be replacing with renewables; and ultimately helps with cost-of-living (albeit over time). I also like the sense of energy security it brings, and dare I say it, semi-independence from my crapola tweedledee and dum distributors and retailers.
I accept its not (yet)a policy that would be affordable is applied en masse, but Germany, eg, offers a guide on how it could work with the right feed-in tarriffs. And who know what efficiencies are yet to come in home solar tech.
Adrian
I don’t know what Lefty E paid for the PV installation, but the Garnaut report says the current cost – including installation – is $6000/kW: ie around $9000 for Lefty E’s installation.
As of day one, Lefty E has generated around $1′s worth of electricity. So only another 8999 more days (around 25 years) to go to pay off the cost.
Not exactly a “no brainer” in my book.
For the appropriately named Incurious and Unread.
FULLY INSTALLED SOLAR FOR $2,990*
http://www.originenergy.com.au/2100/Solar-electricity
Well, it cost me $3000. What the overall cost was I have no idea, but Ill take I&Us advice there. But two points:
First, at this rate my own annual power bill will be $0! At current power charges that will pay off my own investment in 4 years.
As for the state investment, I paid a third myself, so that ‘policy’ investment was in fact $6000, not $9000 – i.e. 16 years payback rather than 25.
Other variables: well, lets see how the feedback to grid ratio goes over a year, but if that’s where it stays, I agree it cant YET be seen as a top-shelfer for public investment, as I noted in previous comment.
BUT: get that down to around 10 years and its not bad at all. Further efficiencies, larger sizes, better feed-in tarrifs may shift those numbers. and there’s the wider benefits noted above.
And of course, there are some other social-economic benefits to that $6000 – supporting PV installers businesses etc.
Lefty E,
Yes, there are various subsidies that makes it attractive for the household to invest. In NSW, with a 60c/unit gross feed-in tariff, the payback period was around 7 years. That really was a no brainer! Once word got around, the government had to close that scheme down quick.
But, excluding subsidies, rooftop solar PV still has some way to go. If carbon prices push retail electricity prices up to 30c/unit, say, the payback period would come down to around 15 years. If the cost of PV can come down another 30%, we’d be looking at around 10 years. At that point, it is starting to make sense. But we are not there yet.
I agree I&U – if the equation got down to 10 years it would make a lot of sense, as average shelf-life for the kit would return a fair deal of “free” power in that scenario, over time.
Well said, Lefty E, particularly on the non-monetary benefits.
It’s about time we all assumed greater responsibility for our energy consumption, and solar is a positive way of doing it.
I got my first electricity bill almost 3 months after getting a 3kW system.
Generated $535 for a ~$170 credit
at $9.6k for installation, payback is ~5years
ACT – gross feed in tariff of 45.7c for 20years – (the rate if installed prior to Jan2010 was around the 50c and it was reduced as solar costs are coming down (by a sensible amount, unlike NSW). I came in on the later rate.
ACT electricity is retail ~15c/kWh, about 5c cheaper than NSW so linking retail price to PV is BS.
Interesting Dave. Does the credit come as cash, or just credit against any future bills?
The other thing Id note (which could just be a newby bounce)but it certainly made us more aware of our usage, and are already switching things off we dont need with a higher level of awareness.
Being a producer rather than simply passive consumer brings responsibility!
In the loo and bathroom I have installed solar flood lights, supposedly for sheds, that cost around 70 bucks with 28leds.
They have a kind of neat industrial look.
They come on by themselves, at dusk, and usually last through to dawn and are quite comfortably bright.
Saves turning on lights, in the night, if the Cooper’s consumption has peaked and are great for guests and kids.
LeftyE – you also need to take into account the opportunity cost. If you put that $3000 into an ING account you’d get a couple of hundred dollars a year. Of course it depends on how electricity prices move in the future (lots of up there!) but the payback time is I think longer than you calculated.
btw there are companies around that will pay the upfront cost for you and charge you a fix rental each year that takes into account maintenance (eg an inverter replacement is likely over the life of the panels) and capital costs. Probably a good option for those who don’t have savings or can’t get loans for solar PV but want to do their bit and/or take advantage of government subsidies.
Gross feed in tarrifs can indeed be quite profitable. Someone in canberra installed a 29kWh system on their house which should make them a tidy profit even taking into account cost of capital which is not inconsiderable.
Dave McRae – I’d agree with you on the effect of FiT on electricity prices. The number of domestic solar installations is so low the effect is minimal. And by the time the number of installations rises to a level which will have an effect they simply won’t offer the FiT to new customers anymore, or reduce its value.
LeftyE said:
That I’d agree with! We don’t have solar PV, but we do have a monitoring system so you can easily see from the kitchen what the current power usage is and what that translates to in terms of cost. Made a big difference to our behaviour in turning off things when we don’t need them. I’d love to have similar devices for gas and water – although water is *so* cheap it might encourage higher usage
Yeah, the monitoring enabled by smart meters really is good for usage awareness.
The thing about the deal I got was that I didnt actually need to $3k – its in 12 monthly installments. So not sure about the oppo cost, really, and dont forget your ING income would be taxable, where the power savings are straight cost reductions.
Lefty E @ 87 – true about tax. And the FiT income I believe is tax-free! If you have a home loan and paid part of that instead you’d get a better return which was also tax free though. The calculations aren’t straight forward
But I think if either electricity prices double or panel prices halve (neither of which is that unlikely in the medium term) it makes sense for nearly everyone to get enough to power their base load usage.
Its too bad batteries are still too expensive though. Would be nice to have something that would still work during power failures.