Lov in

“𝘖𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦; 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸. 𝘙𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢 𝘭𝘶𝘹𝘶𝘳𝘺. 𝘐𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥, 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩, 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” — 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗵, 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘋𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘴𝘵, 𝘖𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘣𝘦𝘳 1939. 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘑𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘈. 𝘓𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘩, (𝘕𝘦𝘸 𝘠𝘰𝘳𝘬: 𝘏𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘉𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘑𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘩, 1970). #EuropeanHeritage #Race #RacialPreservation

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

The peanut 🥜 blackout Bowen always seems to amaze me 🌚🕶whats next?

And come back with a bit more of the plan ?

And they go off about Pauline having a holiday

Spend, spend, spend. It never ends.!!

How do they live with themselves! Easily it seems

What about the homeless citizens 💔

Since when is a conference that isn't even you're own setup, pay for people to attend. Never.

Drunken sailors 🤮

Omg omg omg

Tell me this is a joke

Zero shame

Hows those chemtrails going Robert🤣

Malcolm, it is a balancing act and they have made real progress. Germanys Energy Mix I have formed by view from reading and a long conversation with a German engineering teacher here on holidays. Germany has large reserves of coal with a significant amount close to the surface, it has not been mined because it is surface coal below fertile soil and important food growing areas, a lot of their coal is brown coal which is the dirtiest burning coal, they have stopped using nuclear because of high costs and safety concerns, they get water from the snow melt in Switzerland and the snow depth is decreasing by about 8 cm a decade, nuclear needs a lot of water. It is a complicated situation but it will be interesting as they tackle many different energy mixes. I hope you get to eat your words.

Who knew!

The government should hand out butt plugs before making you bend over...

We knew eventually we would be proven correct because we grounded our position with real world data and simple logic. Whereas the others have relied on majorly flawed studies and ideology.

“𝘖𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦; 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸. 𝘙𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢 𝘭𝘶𝘹𝘶𝘳𝘺. 𝘐𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥, 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩, 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” — 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗵, 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘋𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘴𝘵, 𝘖𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘣𝘦𝘳 1939. 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘑𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘈. 𝘓𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘩, (𝘕𝘦𝘸 𝘠𝘰𝘳𝘬: 𝘏𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘉𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘑𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘩, 1970). #EuropeanHeritage #Race #RacialPreservation

100% true

Maybe look it up before you make comments🤦‍♂️ so they have had an overload to their grid because so many people are using private owned systems and putting power into the grid is bottlenecked it and causing negative power prices. So they arent cutting funding because it failed, but because it worked to well

Yeah because they spent the money they have the infrastructure to be able to do that now.

Save the money, slash welfare and taxes should be the motto.

OMG, quoting Electroverse 😆

🤡

Yet Malcolm the Germans are still buying ev's

Malcolm hope you have your foil hat on ….. Malcolm’s sharing screenshots again. Must be exhausting keeping up with all the conspiracies — climate scientists, the UN, renewable energy, and now Germany’s budget. At this point the only thing he hasn’t blamed is the lizard people.

Of course one nation is planning to move back to mined power sources, they’re funded by a billionaire mining magnate

Is this what you are talking about..?? It's all over now ...

But in Australia the people are still being conned. Germany now have the experience that renewables are expensive energy and it is damaging manufacturing. Vote labor out and get Australia's energy back on track vote for ONE NATION.

The Germans have also cut themselves off from cheap Russian energy. By order of the Americans, and now VW is going bust.

They either based their ideology around the modelling, or their modelling around their ideology. Either way, they didnt explore real world examples or basic common sense. There are no surprises that its all gone tits up. 😵‍💫

As usual Senator Malcolm Roberts spreads misinformation. Germany is not raiding €30 billion from its climate fund. It is proposing a 30 per cent reduction to some uncommitted programs, reportedly worth about €3.4 billion, while still planning approximately €40.3 billion in climate-fund spending during 2027. Existing commitments remain protected, and the supposed “slashing” of EV support amounts to a 10 per cent reduction of €200 million through 2029 not its abolition🙄🙄😆😆😆. The money being redirected will help households and industries with electricity and grid costs. That is not Germany admitting renewable energy has failed. It is a government adjusting subsidies and providing cost-of-living and industry relief during an energy transition. Electroverse isn’t even a scientific authority-it’s an advocacy blog that regularly challenges the mainstream scientific consensus on climate change. Start fact checking before you post this rubbish!

China and India have never stopped, and are still pumping out the coal plants like crazy.

Unfortunately we need to fail before the sheep wake up…

What about bioconvergence meta police web3 smart everything post human scam?

Why don't you post what Germany's energy mix is compared to ours and state the real fact instead of posing an Xpost....and your policy????? Its ok to say get rid of net zero but what is your policy on how you would do that and the costings ....oh yes but no costings" we haven't got the staff"...

And a quick fact check here... There are fair lessons to take from Germany, but I don’t think this post represents them honestly. Germany has absolutely made mistakes. Closing functioning nuclear plants while remaining dependent on imported gas looks, in hindsight, like a poor strategic choice. Its transition has also been expensive, politically messy and at times badly sequenced. Those are legitimate criticisms, and Australia should learn from them. But Germany is not simply abandoning climate action or admitting that renewable energy was a scam. The reported change is a reduction in some uncommitted programs within its climate fund, while tens of billions of euros remain allocated to energy relief, infrastructure, modernisation and the broader transition. Heat-pump and EV support are being reduced or redesigned, not simply erased. Germany’s high energy prices also have several causes: the loss of cheap Russian gas, its nuclear shutdown, grid and infrastructure costs, market design and wider economic problems. Blaming the whole situation on wind and solar is much too convenient. Renewables now provide more than half of Germany’s electricity consumption. The real lesson is not “end the transition”. It is that an energy transition must be carefully sequenced, technologically open, honest about costs and designed around reliability and public support. Keep nuclear on the table where appropriate. Build transmission and storage before retiring dependable capacity. Protect households and industry. Avoid ideological deadlines that run ahead of engineering reality. But cutting climate and transformation spending to cover immediate energy costs is not evidence that the underlying risks have disappeared. It may simply mean the transition was managed poorly. That is the serious conversation Australia should be having: not transition versus no transition, but what mix of renewables, storage, firming, efficiency, public investment and potentially nuclear gives us the most reliable, affordable and resilient system over the long term. “End net zero and save money” is a slogan. What is the complete energy plan for the decades after that?

Because they are proven Malcolm and no longer need subsidies, just like Australia 🇦🇺 they have reduced guarantees for domestic solar for payout per KW But keep pumping your Gina Agenda

Aiden is a researcher at the Centre for Independent Studies, a think tank that has reportedly received funding from companies including BHP and Shell. That’s worth keeping in mind when considering the perspective being presented.

Renewables are renewable. Coal can only be burnt once.

Why is that mature+Nuclear line the highest?

Wholesale electricity prices in Australia's National Energy Market, averaged over the last 12 months. You can check these for yourself, by going to the OpenNEM webpage. Percentages are the contribution to electricity use in Australia, wholesale prices in dollars per megawatt hour. As of 18th July 2026: Solar 22.2%, $27.79 Wind 16.4%, $52.57 Coal 50.0% $76.27 Hydro 6.1% $100.36 Battery Discharging 1.4%, $120.69 Gas 3.7%, $147.42

‘expert’

Let me sum this up for you. CSIRO/AEMO models the grid for planning, Morrison models the grid for argumentation.

Nice editing out the context at the bottom.

Malcolm you're summation only works if the CSIRO is in on a conspiracy. Funny that.

meanwhile in the real world, the Australian Energy Regulator is reducing the the minimum default offer for the next period (which governs electricity prices) accross most of the country thanks to the cheaper power produced from renewable sources

Simple physics tells us that swapping the most dense form of creating energy for the least dense form of creating energy must be totally inefficient in every way including economically and environmentally.

Aiden likes coal, right?

Matthew Imagine if cost was the only factor that determined if something was a good idea. Malcolm engaged all his brain power for this post. 😂

Yeah a fire in a rock cave - way cheaper.

Dear Malcolm. Climate Change is a reality. Coal is not an option. Mitigation is a necessity.

Gaslights Get em here Clydesdale Studs Whale Oil Lamps They’re the future 😵‍💫

It’s not about who the person is making the post, but what does the data actually say. The CSIRO has conceded that its previous costings did not look at transmission and other factors.

Don’t trust the numbers game they can massage them the same way as they can get the required results from the CSIRO ☹️✌️

The CSIRO chart actually shows the exact opposite of the tweet's claim. While achieving deeper emission cuts increases overall grid integration costs across the board, a system built on mature renewables remains the most cost-effective way to get there compared to introducing CCS or nuclear power.

Malcolm uses a GenCost report as “evidence” and states in the same post: “GenCost reports are largely fraudulent”. Which one is it mate?

What's the source of the image in the tweet? I notice it ends with "but lower cost", then cuts off. I feel like sharing complete sentences instead of cherry-picking the first half of one is kind of important.

Is Twitter empirical evidence?😂

Well Senator Malcolm Roberts i don't think this post has gone the way you expected🤣🤣🤣

The book fearing mental midget has spoken…… Get off the Bongs