Review of the Renewable Energy Target
Review Submission
Bruce Armstrong
May 16, 2014
Revison 1, 15 may 2014
Renewable Energy Target review submission
Contents
1
2
3
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3
Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................................................... 4
Notes and Observations ................................................................................................................. 5
3.1
Risk management.................................................................................................................. 5
3.1.1 The precautionary principle.............................................................................................. 5
3.2
Economic issues .................................................................................................................... 5
3.2.1 Employment...................................................................................................................... 5
3.2.2 Regional development ...................................................................................................... 5
3.2.3 Limits to growth (the Club of Rome) ................................................................................ 6
3.2.4 International Energy Agency (IEA) .................................................................................... 6
3.2.5 Stranded coal assets ......................................................................................................... 6
3.3
Environmental issues ............................................................................................................ 7
3.3.1 Weather destabilization ................................................................................................... 7
3.3.2 Methane and CO2 in the atmosphere ............................................................................... 7
3.3.3 Ocean heat stores ............................................................................................................. 8
3.3.4 Ocean acidification ........................................................................................................... 8
3.3.5 Greenhouse gas limitations .............................................................................................. 9
3.3.6 Limits to fossil fuel consumption ...................................................................................... 9
3.4
Energy sources and issues................................................................................................... 10
3.4.1 Scale of existing fossil fuel use........................................................................................ 10
3.4.2 Biofuels and fossil fuel displacement ............................................................................. 10
3.4.3 Oil availability.................................................................................................................. 10
3.4.4 Transport ........................................................................................................................ 11
3.4.5 Coal ................................................................................................................................. 11
3.4.6 CO2 sequestration .......................................................................................................... 11
3.4.7 Nuclear Power ................................................................................................................ 12
3.4.8 Rooftop Solar .................................................................................................................. 12
3.4.9 Wind................................................................................................................................ 13
3.4.10
Hydro .......................................................................................................................... 13
3.5
Disinformation campaigns .................................................................................................. 13
3.5.1 Confusion between weather and climate ...................................................................... 13
3.5.2 Selective reporting of the temperature record .............................................................. 14
3.5.3 Positive spin on warming ................................................................................................ 14
3.5.4 Denial of CO2 linkage to temperature ............................................................................ 14
3.5.5 The Waubra Foundation’s Anti-wind campaign ............................................................. 14
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 2 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
1 Introduction
This is my effort to summarise the need for action on climate change and its effect on our
generation and use of energy from the various sources.
I am an ordinary citizen with scientific training in unrelated field. For many years I have been
interested in environmental issues, being employed analysing environmental data in the 1980s and
designing marine data collection instruments in the early 1990s. My interest started when I read
“The Limits to Growth” at a young age. In recent years, I have become more interested in the
systemic effects of civilization’s choices and consumption patterns. I have endeavored to become
well informed on climate and resource issues.
There have been many examples through history of civilizations that have run into resource
limitations and collapsed, but none that have done this on a global scale. At least, not yet!
While Australia represents only a small fraction of global demand and pollution, it has, until recently,
been in a position to set an example and to lead the behavior of many other nations, making the
actions of this small antipodean country disproportionately important.
Since the 2013 election of the Abbott government, Australia has lost much of its credibility. The
proposed repeal of the carbon price, replacing it with a grossly inferior mechanism, according to
Ross Garnaut, can only cement Australia’s new position as a laggard. I fear that dilution of the
Renewable Energy target will serve to elevate Australia to pariah status in international circles.
This is quite a legacy if the LNP can achieve it!
I urge the Renewable Energy Target review panel to consider the risks to both the nation and world
climate systems when assessing the RET targets.
I offer this document for the panel’s consideration.
Bruce Armstrong
16 May, 2014
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 3 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
2 Conclusions and recommendations
I see the RET and fossil fuel use (coal or gas) as linked. The higher the RET, the lower the use and
dependency on coal (gas) and the lower the carbon pollution emissions. The RET, or lack thereof, is a
proxy for coal use.
Clean fixes for coal (or natural gas) in the form of capturing the CO2 combustion by product. Even the
CCS proponents admit that the technology is nowhere near useful, and may ultimately be so
expensive that is it will never be viable. I place this in the same category of fusion power, which has
stubbornly remained 50 years out of reach for more than half a century now.
The environment can only accommodate so much CO2 before the greenhouse effect forcing global
warming will be so strong that the earth becomes so hostile that civilization fails. It is estimated that
there is 5 times as much remaining fossil fuels in identified reserves as can safely be burnt. This is a
very serious issue and dwarfs all others.
Recently the IEA released a report that indicates that coal use must cease completely before 2050. In
practical terms this means ramping down very soon. This is consistent with the environmental
imperative mentioned above.
I read all this as meaning that no new coal fired power can be considered. The RET is needed as a
signal that only renewable energy can be used and that existing fossil fuel energy systems must be
phased out soon.
I note that environmental forecasts tend become worse as more data is colleted, so the required
rate of replacement of fossil fuels may well be significantly higher than presently indicated.
This importance of this issue cannot be understated. I feel that it is likely that the world community
will eventually place sanctions on laggard nations that have not addressed their climate change
contributions adequately.
Whatever, the renewable energy target is, it will have an end point of 80% or greater renewables by
2050 at the latest. The trajectory of how the nation gets there is debatable, but the longer the
nation waits, the more disruptive the change will be.
The Club of Rome indicates that around 2030 is a significant time for world economic fitness. It may
be extraordinarily difficult to maintain civilization’s systems after that. I read this as if we haven’t
mostly freed ourselves from oil and coal by then, it will be too late.
I see it to be vitally important to ensure that Renewable Energy Target achieves a deep reduction in
the consumption of fossil fuels soon.
I urge the review panel to maintain or increase the RET, our future depends on independence from
fossil fuels. They must remain mostly unburnt and in the ground.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 4 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3 Notes and Observations
In this section, I present a number of supporting comments for my conclusions.
3.1 Risk management
3.1.1 The precautionary principle
This is very important and frequently completely overlooked when the effects of climate change are
considered. It would appear that the denial campaigners do not consider this to be important.
The problem we have is that the climate ‘experiment’ is global. If the vast majority of scientists are
correct and fossil fuel burning continues unabated, then the result is unthinkably bad and will likely
be the end of civilization, as we know it. If this does eventuate, there is no escape; we and our
descendants are doomed. doomed.
Even a remote change of this happening should sufficient to cause major action to avert it. With
each datum analysed, the science on this subject is becoming increasingly clear and the conclusion is
that continued business as usual will almost certainly cause this outcome.
This catastrophe must be avoided at any cost.
3.2 Economic issues
3.2.1 Employment
Both solar and wind have the potential to be major employers in a truly sustainable industry. This is
particularly true in small scale solar that employs many people where they live, in the suburbs.
Even with a strong renewable sector, Australia has delegated almost all of its manufacturing
overseas, largely to china. Any benefits from the renewables sector can only be partially realized
without local content policy in the components.
3.2.2 Regional development
Recent stories in the RenewEconomy have reported the possibility of remote and country
communities moving to community power supplies. This frees the utilities from having to maintain
transmission lines to these communities.
In this environment, fossil fuels represent costly import and easily justify solar, wind and battery
storage systems.
Regional wind farms deliver a significant financial bonus to land owners hosting the turbines. The
presence of the turbines does not significantly affect crops or livestock, so the extra income comes
at little expense to the farmer.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 5 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.2.3 Limits to growth (the Club of Rome)
In 1972, the Club of Rome released a book that published the results of the world-3 model that had
been developed to gain an understanding of where the world was heading and whether humanity
could influence the outcome. “The Limits to Growth” described several scenarios that the group
modeled. One in particular, the ‘standard run’ predicted exhaustion of resources and a collapse by
the middle of this century.
The original model and book have been reviewed several times since the original publication, the
most recent in 2012 in the form of a symposium presented at the Smithsonian on the USA. Many of
the original authors presented their perspectives at that meeting.
Dennis meadows presented his perspectives at that meeting a reiterated the standard run as being
the trajectory the human race is on. He confirmed that a collapse of civilization is likely by 2030. This
could have been avoided by inspired action had been taken from the 1970s, but it didn’t happen, so
we are on the path indicated by the ‘standard run’ model.
Reference:
Meadows, Dennis; Meadows, Donella; Randers, Jørgen, The limits to Growth, Universe Books, 1972
3.2.4 International Energy Agency (IEA)
This week (13 may 2014) in the IEA’s 2014 Biannual technology Perspective report, that organisation
recommends a clean energy future with renewables making up 80% of energy supplies by 2050.
The IEA data suggests that some semblance of business as usual may be continued up to 2030 or so,
but then coal dependency must be quickly eliminated.
Doubtlessly the limitations of the planet to cope with continued oil and coal burning have played a
large part in this statement.
In any case, the Abbot government’s desire to muzzle renewable energy deployment is at odds with
this report.
3.2.5 Stranded coal assets
The elements of this document indicate that coal use must end in the near future.
When business leaders such as Michael Bloomberg pledge to end the use of coal and back these
with a $50M grant to campaign for the end of coal use in the USA, the cays of acceptable coal use
are numbered.
This year, the Canadian province of Ontario shut down the last coal fired power station. Ontario has
a population approaching that of all of Australia, so this is significant.
The Chinese are working very hard at reducing their dependence on coal, with estimates in the
Renew Economy indicating that their use of coal will peak between 2016 and 2020. After this, coal
use in china will decline monotonically.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 6 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
The IEA has indicated that coal use must cease by 2050 at the latest.
All of the above indicate that the future for coal use is bleak. There is a real possibility that there will
be little demand for Australian coal within a few years, yet we persist with doubling of export
capacity at Gladstone in QLD. I think that it is very likely that coal assets will become effectively
worthless in the near future.
There are implications for any states using coal for electricity generation; While there may be a lot of
unburnt coal around, it will not be usable because of its dire effect on the atmosphere and climate.
3.3 Environmental issues
3.3.1 Weather destabilization
Depending or the lens used to view current weather, it can either be seen as
a) A series of unrelated exceptional events or
b) As part of an emerging pattern
Not looking at weather events as part of a pattern is disingenuous. As once a century events are
becoming more commonplace, it is apparent that there is a pattern emerging and that this pattern is
consistent with the expectation of weather in a warmer world.
3.3.2 Methane and CO2 in the atmosphere
CO2 and methane are two of the most important greenhouse gases, with methane being
approximately 25 times as potent a component as CO2. These gases are currently having a definite
and measurable effect on the climate
The course* (PHSC 13400: Global Warming) presented in 2009 by David Archer at University of
Chicago teaches participants how to construct a climate model from first principles. This course is
intended for non-scientists and is presented in a very accessible manner that does not rely on
complex mathematics.
The course demonstrates that CO2 and global warming is not ‘rocket science’ and is governed by
simple physical principles. It succinctly demonstrates why small changes in CO2 concentration have a
significant effect on global temperatures.
Methane is also discussed, as to why it is such a potent greenhouse gas. Essentially this gas is
persistent and historically low in concentration, so adding some Methane provides a relatively much
greater re-radiation effect than is the case for CO2, which is already in a significant concentration.
IT should be noted that the greenhouse effect has been known for more than a century. It was first
proposed by Joseph Fourier in 1824, subsequently improved and finally quantified by Svante
Arrhenius in 1896, which is generally considered to be the start date of the modern understanding.
With more than a century of science and observations, this is one of the best confirmed theories.
* This course is available free, online from the university.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 7 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.3.3 Ocean heat stores
The world’s oceans store some 93.4% (Wikipedia: Ocean heat content) of the energy accumulated
by global warming. This has the effect of meliorating and delaying the effects of our current CO2
emissions.
In addition to absorbing the vast bulk of global warming, the oceans also respond to El Niño and La
Niña climate states by storing additional heat during La Niña via transport to the deep ocean.
Since 1971, the ocean temperature has been accurately measured, particularly from the advent of
free floating, satellite connected devices than provide temperature and salinity profiles through the
water column. The total heat content of the world’s oceans has been precisely known for more than
ten years now. Please refer to the “World Oceans Database Project” for details of the measurement
program.
In addition to storing enormous amounts of heat energy, the oceans have a very long response time
(time constant) such that heat we put into them this century will still be evident in the year 3000!
3.3.4 Ocean acidification
As the oceans absorb CO2, the dissolved gas reacts with the water and becomes carbonic acid, which
lowers the pH of the ocean. Many animals, particularly the micro-invertebrates with calcified
skeletons are very sensitive to pH, a small acidification causing these animals great harm.
This is important because they form the base of the ocean food chain. Without If these small
animals, most life in the oceans will also be disrupted and possibly die out.
Coral is also adversely affected by ocean acidification, but the base of the food chain is far more
important and sensitive.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 8 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.3.5 Greenhouse gas limitations
Following from Arrehenius, there is a large body of work linking CO2 to global temperature.
Many additional factors have been identified, such as the complex and variable part oceans play in
absorbing CO2 and heat energy.
The Copenhagen Climate summit recommended that global temperature must not rise by more then
2 degrees C. This effectively sets a limit on the amount of CO2 that can be emitted.
Climatologist, James Hansen (then at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies) has modeled the
CO2 limit for the atmosphere and published his results it in Open Atmospheric Science Journal of
2008. In this study, he stated that required long term atmospheric CO2 limit is 350 parts per million.
He also stated that the near term CO2 concentration must be kept below 450 ppm to avert
dangerous (fatal to civilisation?) consequences.
Currently, CO2 concentration is very close to 400ppm and rising at 2 ppm per year.
Reference:
Hansen, J., M. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, R. Berner, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo,
D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos, 2008: Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? Open
Atmos. Sci. J., 2, 217-231, doi:10.2174/1874282300802010217.
3.3.6 Limits to fossil fuel consumption
It is unlikely that carbon sequestration will ever be able to remove CO2 from vehicle and power
station exhaust gases, leaving limiting the use of fossil fuels as the only possible outcome.
It is possible to directly compute the amount of fossil fuel that, when burnt, will raise the
atmospheric CO2 concentration to the limit calculated by James Hansen et al. According to Bill
McKibben in his ‘Do the math campaign’, this figure is 565Gt CO2.
Currently, the world is emitting more than 30Gt of CO2, rising at 3% per year, giving a time to this
reach this limit of less than 15 years.
Consuming all of the presently identified fossil fuel reserves would emit 2795Gt of CO2, five times
the amount that can be safely emitted.
Clearly, a strict limit on the use of fossil fuels is coming or the human race will be the victim of its
own ingenuity and success.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 9 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.4 Energy sources and issues
3.4.1 Scale of existing fossil fuel use
The amount of energy civilization uses presents a major challenge to replace the existing electricity
generation fuels.
3.4.2 Biofuels and fossil fuel displacement
Corn ethanol has a very poor energy return in energy investment, in the range of less than one to
1.25, depending on the source of data. This means that for each unit of energy expended in the
corn-ethanol process, at best, 1.25 units are obtained. Compare this to free flowing oil wells that
have historically returned 100 units of energy per unit expended or Photovoltaics that return 10 or
so units over their lifetimes.
Of the USA’s 350 million acres of cropland, approximately 88 million acres are devoted to ethanol
production.
Corn ethanol should more correctly be seen as a means of converting oil and coal into ethanol,
which is then burnt as the oil or coal would have been. The very low EROI makes this a doubtful
venture.
References:
David Murphy, “New perspectives on Energy return on (energy) investment (EROI) of corn ethanol”,
The Oil Drum: Net Energy, Jul 27, 2010
Michael Economides, Forbes, “Ethanol isn’t worth costlier corn flakes and tortillas”, 17 may, 2011
3.4.3 Oil availability
During his talk, Kopits argues persuasively that the convention al oil peak occurred in 2005 and we
are now on a bumpy plateau before entering a terminal decline in availability sometime in the near
future.
The talk discussed the exploration and well completion costs (upstream spend) of the major oil
companies. This is a huge amount that has been increasing rapidly in recent years, but has not
produced any increase in their reserves in this period. The implications are chilling; exploration is
being curtailed and the companies are selling assets to remain cash flow positive for now.
Unconventional oil is being promoted as the next big thing the Unites States. Apparently, the USA
will be an oil exporter by 2020. There are some inconvenient facts that are consistently overlooked,
such as the huge annual decline in flow rates of fracked wells. It is sufficient to make most of the
wells effectively useless within 5 years.
The writing is clearly on the wall for the imminent decline of oil.
Reference:
Steven Kopits, “Global Oil Market Forecasting- Main Approaches - Key Drivers”, CGEP Columbia
University, 25 February, 2014. (this is available as a video of the presentation, on youTube and
others)
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 10 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.4.4 Transport
With the closure of the last refineries in the country, Australian transport is in the position of being
almost totally dependent on imported oil supplies and fully exposed to any availability or price
fluctuations.
In a rational world, this fact would be acknowledged and a risk management plan put in place. I
would expect that this would include electrification of the vehicle fleet, freeing it from oil
dependence. Natural gas may be valuable as a transition for heavy transport and rail.
Electric vehicles should be accommodated in the future energy requirements. Fortunately , this is
not all bad, as these vehicles have large batteries and have potential to support the electricity grid
when the vehicles are plugged in.
Presently, the total electric vehicle fleet in Australia is less then 1000.
3.4.5 Coal
For power generation, is it isn’t renewable it will be coal. Gas is already too expensive for base-load
power.
The need to maintain the atmosphere in a state that is compatible with continued civilization will
result in most of the remaining coal having to be left in the ground. Burning it simply won’t be an
option.
The IEA has indicated tat coal burning must stop in the next few years. I would ask if there will be
international sanctions against countries that have chosen not to act on the pressing need to check
CO2 emissions.
3.4.6 CO2 sequestration
An interesting thing occurred on 20 September 2013 when the United States EPA announced that all
new coal fired power stations must be fitted with CCS technology.
This should have been great news for an industry that has spent a lot of time and effort arguing that
CCS is the technology to make coal fired power ‘clean’ and compatible with the reducing CO2
emissions. The torrents of complaint and threats of lawsuits that followed from the EPA
announcement showed CCS not to be as the coal industry has claimed it to be.
Apparently, CCS is an expensive pipe-dream and unlikely to be used by the power industry. Certainly,
public policy should not be dependent on this expensive and unproven technology ever maturing to
a point that it makes a useful contribution.
Reference:
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/coal-industry-kicks-own-goal-as-obama-calls-bluff-on-ccs99871
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 11 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.4.7 Nuclear Power
Nuclear power has been mentioned as a ‘solution’ for Australia’s future energy needs.
There are a number of issues with nuclear power in Australia:
 Here are no power reactors in the country and a very small pool of existing expertise.
 It is expensive. Ontario Power Corporation publishes the costs of operating its nuclear power
fleet.
 A large number of reactors would be required to supply Australia.
 Build time is long from approval to opening.
 Perceived risks are huge, irrespective of the actual risks.
 Great public opposition exists.
 Decommissioning and waste disposal are significant problems.
 The fuel is non-renewable. Various estimates for ‘peak uranium’ exist, indicating that the
fuel may be exhausted within 30 years, probably less if widespread adoption is seen.
 Possibly more available thorium can be used as a fuel.
At the same time as the costs of building and operating nuclear power plants is increasing, the cost
of wind power is decreasing making nuclear power extremely hard to sell to the people.
3.4.8 Rooftop Solar
Rooftop solar is now considerably less expensive then grid power, making it an obvious choice for
residential consumers and businesses. The costs of solar power continue to decline, as is the cost of
battery storage.
Various stories on the RenewEconomy indicate that the continued uptake of solar power is now
unstoppable. The removal of promotional feed in tariffs has done little to dampen consumer
interest. As with the FIT schemes, the SRES may not be needed for consumers to justify installing
solar power soon.
I agree with the views expressed in the RenewEconomy, that current renewable energy has had the
effect of limiting electricity prices by way of suppressing merit order pricing peaks when solar power
generation aligns with summer peak demand. As uptake continues in dormitory suburbs, storage
may be necessary to realize the generation capacity in the PV units.
The RenewEconomy has run many stories discussing the possibility of augmenting domestic power
supplies with batteries. Vector energy in New Zealand has gone as far as leasing batter storage
systems to customers. These are grid tied buffers that reduce consumers evening peak demand.
Vector’s delivery model is affordable and customer-friendly.
One area that is not adequately exploited is that of business premises, where demand and
generation align very well. At the current time, the internal rate or return for installed solar power is
approximately 25%, making this an obvious choice for eligible businesses.
References:
“RenewEconomy” website, numerous stories.
Vector energy, New Zealand: http://vector.co.nz/solar
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 12 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.4.9 Wind
Wind power offers on of the most efficient and accessible forms of renewable energy. It is oddly
maligned in Australia when it is happily accepted in Europe.
Consider that the world installed more than 34,000 MW in 2013, part of a trend that has delivered
some 318,000 MW of wind capacity to date. This is a tremendous amount of energy, equivalent to
about 100 large coal power stations.
While installations have stalled in the US, they are surging in China, where the installed capacity is
now more than 90,000 MW, with 16,000 MW added in 2013.
Consider the IEA future energy mix report described in this report and it is very likely that the future
will be dominated by wind and solar energy systems.
Reference:
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/02/06/2013-wind-energy-installations-stall-u-s-surge-china/
3.4.10
Hydro
Australia is a flat, dry country with limited prospects for hydroelectricity. Most reports I have seen
suggest that almost all available resources have been exploited, with little prospect for expansion.
One area that is significant is using pumped hydro for storage of energy. The efficiency is
comparable to lead-acid batteries, but the capacity is only limited by the head and reservoir size.
Capacities in the order of 5GWh are possible in many locations around Australia. This is possibly a
useful partner for coastal wind farms.
Reference:
http://sen.asn.au/files/SEN_REscenarios_discussionpaper_web.pdf
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/
3.5 Disinformation campaigns
There are many obviously disingenuous campaigns that serve to confuse the public and
governments through actively disseminating disinformation. This section discusses several of these
campaigns.
It is important to detect and discard the output of these campaigns.
3.5.1 Confusion between weather and climate
Frequently weather and climate are confused. This appears to be principally an issue of public
misunderstanding of the difference between the two.
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 13 of 14
Renewable Energy Target review submission
3.5.2 Selective reporting of the temperature record
This manifests as statements such as “global temperatures have been decreasing”. Most often, the
period used is 1998 to 2007. 1998 is important because it corresponded to an El Niño event and was
particularly warm, so the following years, up to the next El Niño do show a cooling trend. Of course,
each El Niño year shatters this perception, but this fact is ignored by the contrarians promoting this
view.
If the heat being stored in the oceans is included, this effect is proven to be false.
3.5.3 Positive spin on warming
This is one of the more mischievous arguments. While it is true that some places may be affected
positively by a warming climate, the majority of the world will not be.
One of the most at risk areas in the world is Southwestern Australia, where a drying trend has been
underway since the 1970s, a trend that is expected to continue with global warming. One concerning
effect was seen in WA recently, there has a die-off of trees, including banksias. The affected trees
were attacked by borers, but the cause was discovered to be high temperatures. Banksias are
severely stressed by temperatures greater than 32 degrees C. This is a disturbingly low temperature
and points to extinction of these trees in susceptible areas.
Reference:
ABC Australia, Tree Deaths, Catalyst, 26 April 2012
3.5.4 Denial of CO2 linkage to temperature
The relationship between was quantified more then 100 years ago. The period from then until now
has been one of unequivocal confirmation of the effect and its magnitude.
3.5.5 The Waubra Foundation’s Anti-wind campaign
This is a perfect example of ‘astroturfing’, a fake grass roots campaign. As consumers, we are
expected to believe that the wind turbines cause many and varied ailments and are not safe to live
anywhere near. Treasurer Joe Hockey has gone as far as to refer to the turbines in the ACT as ‘utterly
offensive’.
The supposed infrasound effect of wind turbines has failed to materialize when studied scientifically.
According to the RenewEconomy (see the story Mixed Greens: Wind turbines don’t affect health,
AMA says) All of the 20 studies conducted up to march, this year reached the same conclusion.
The residents of Waubra are not suffering “wind turbine syndrome” and have demanded that the
Waubra Foundation stop using their town name is its campaign. Please refer to the RenewEconomy
for more information.
References:
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/mixed-greens-wind-turbines-dont-affect-health-ama-says-99112
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/mixed-greens-anti-wind-not-in-our-name-says-waubra-59889
Author: Bruce Armstrong
16 May 2014
page 14 of 14