In which the pond lowers the temperature with a sampling of simplistic Simon and the quarry-whispering Caterist ...

 

Back to the reptile grindstone on a Monday, and with a Dutch comedy show having replaced Kimmel in the pond's viewing... (the pond always dropped out of any Kimmel viewing when the show took to the streets to celebrate American ignorance).

Now all that's needed is for the pond to find a way to shake its daily reptile viewing habit ...

That EXCLUSIVE reptile poll dropped down a notch, what with news of Palestine, but the pond went there anyway ...

EXCLUSIVE
Newspoll finds men, young voters desert Ley-led Coalition
The Coalition’s support among voters under 35 has collapsed to just 18 per cent as it haemorrhages male voters who once formed its core base.
By Geoff Chambers

The pond was compelled, not by the yarn or the meaningless statistical fodder, which will be quickly replaced in the coming weeks by yet more reptile EXCLUSIVES, but by the way that the reptiles portrayed Susssan, as a grey lady situated in a deep blue field of mourning...

This was compounded when the pond looked over on the extreme far right to see that Geoff had chambered another round, and was briefly top of the reptile world ma...

Liberal leadership crisis looms as Sussan Ley’s support drops to record low
Despite internal mutterings of new conservative or moderate breakaway parties, the Coalition can rebuild its brand ... but it will be a long road back
By Geoff Chambers

Again it was the way that visually the reptiles were heavily backing in that lettuce ...

Poor Susssan was given more cruel visual treatment, shown gesturing and looking very doubtful and a tad fearful ...

As for the rest, the pond has become increasingly tired of Major Mitchell's rampant Zionism and his devotion to genocide, mass starvation and ethnic cleansing ...

So this was sent to the archive, where those who can be bothered can easily find it and dose themselves up ...

Qatar bombing exposed media naivety on Hamas
Why was anyone surprised Israel attacked a room full of Hamas leaders in Doha on September 9 when it had footage of those very leaders celebrating in that same room on October 7, 2023?

By Chris Mitchell

Spoiler alert, the Major ended this day ...

...The truth is that Hamas and Qatar – rather than Israel – harbour genocidal intent. Hamas does not support a two-state solution and in its original 1988 charter specifically committed to the destruction of Israel and the murder of its Jews.
This is what people chanting “from the river to the sea” are backing.

Nonsense of course, and if you want to save eyeballs, there's always an alternative, where the government which can enact, and is enacting, "from the river to the sea" can be found busy at work ... per Haaretz ...

Israel Eyes Partial West Bank Annexation After Wave of Palestinian State Recognition, but Awaits U.S. Backing,  Any partial annexation move is only expected to deepen Israel's political isolation, endanger its relations with Egypt and Jordan, bring to a total collapse of the normalization agreement with the United Arab Emirates, and bury any chance of advancing a deal with Saudi Arabia (sorry paywall):

Inter alia ...

"There will be no Palestinian state west of the Jordan River," Netanyahu said, adding that he had long prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state despite internal and external pressure. "Indeed, we doubled Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, and we will continue on this path," Netanyahu added.
The prime minister's vague response, which hints that a practical response may follow, was most likely intended to once again bring the far-right's dreams for a full annexation of the West Bank back into the media spotlight.
Several ministers from Netanyahu's government called to immediately apply Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank following the recognition earlier Sunday, and far-right minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called for "the complete dismantling of the Palestinian terror authority."
However, such a move is only expected to deepen Israel's political isolation, endanger its relations with Egypt and Jordan, bring to a total collapse of the normalization agreement with the United Arab Emirates, and bury any chance of advancing a deal with Saudi Arabia.
Amid the right-wing pushing for full annexation, Israel has recently been examining the potential implications of a limited move to annex parts of the Jordan Valley. It remains unclear how the U.S., Jordan or the United Arab Emirates would perceive such a move.
However, it is clear that such a limited move would not satisfy Israel's right-wing political players, who view the cold shoulder turned on Israel by many countries as an opportunity to unilaterally redefine Israel's borders.
A source familiar with the matter who spoke to Haaretz said that Netanyahu's associates believe that a formal annexation announcement is unlikely, given the United Arab Emirates' warning earlier this month that such a move would jeopardize the Abraham Accords.
However, the source also said that officials close to Netanyahu are considering changing the status of Area B in the West Bank, which is currently under Palestinian civilian control but Israeli security control, to match that of Area C – placing it under full Israeli military and civil control.
Israel has also been considering a series of potential sanctions against countries that recognize a Palestinian state. These include revoking entry permits to Ramallah for the countries' diplomats, and a possible closure of the countries' consulates in Jerusalem, a measure which Israeli officials view as a drastic one. The primary target is the French consulate, as France is leading the collective recognition initiative alongside Saudi Arabia.

And again, for the closer ...

Last month, Israel gave final approval to settlement construction plans in the E1 area, which would sever the northern West Bank from the south. The long-disputed plans, delayed for years under international pressure, have far-reaching implications for the viability of a two-state solution and have drawn sharp global criticism.
Upon the approval, far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said, "The Palestinian state is being erased – not in slogans, but in actions."

Or perhaps try ...

Peter Beinart: 'What Israel Is Doing in the Name of the Jewish People Is a Desecration' (archive link)

A few teaser trailer quotes...

'When you say that you want the entire Palestinian population of Gaza expelled, or when the Israeli state goes into villages in the South Hebron Hills and destroys structures, those, to me, are also acts that should be defined as terrorism.'

'There are more children with amputated limbs in Gaza than anywhere else on Earth. I see pictures from there and they haunt me.'

'Apartheid is a word that describes a system of racial, ethnic or religious-legal domination and oppression. I also call the Jim Crow laws in the American South apartheid. Therefore, I think the term is appropriate for Israel.'

The pond also felt no need to go on about Charlie Kirk or the state of the United States ... a few 'toons will do to sum up the American condition ...

For the rest, the pond decided to lower the temperature by indulging in some bog standard reptile climate science denialism.

Simpleton Simon was on hand to help ...

The header: Labor gambles on hidden details of emissions ambition, What is being proposed – and admitted to in the government’s emissions-reduction report – is that it won’t be reachable without major intervention.

The caption for the sinister snap showing gleefully Albo smirking at all the damage he'd wrought: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will spruik Australia’s superior net-zero credentials to the UN in New York this week. Picture: Adam Yip

Simplistic Simon took a full four minutes, so the reptiles said, to survey the scene, and raise as many saucy doubts and fears as he simply could:
There is a gulf of time and doubt between the federal government’s ambition for its 2035 emissions-reduction target and its plans to achieve it.
That’s not to say it isn’t achievable. But what’s being proposed – and admitted to in the government’s own report – is that it won’t be reachable without major intervention.
People need to be aware of just how much this may change their lives. It will be transformational. Many may choose this for themselves. But for those that don’t, it becomes coercive.
What Energy Minister Chris Bowen and Anthony Albanese did last week was release just part of the story.
As a tale of climate heroism, it will be enough to win applause in New York this week, where the Prime Minister expects to spruik Australia’s superior net-zero credentials to the UN.
This is all well and good. While Labor may have established the national ambition, what’s largely buried in the detail of the appendices to its net-zero report is the critical detail about what’s required to achieve it.
It’s this staged approach to releasing the full story that creates an inherent political vulnerability for the government.
The political strategy has echoes of 2019, when Bill Shorten’s pledge of a 45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 unravelled ahead of the election. Much like what we’re seeing now, there was an absence of detail on what would be required to deliver it – and its ultimate cost.

Is there ever a reptile story about climate change which doesn't feature a terrifying, frightening, nightmarish snap of the whale-killers around Goulburn, haunting the beefy boofhead? Of course there isn't,  There is an absence of detail on what is required to reach the target. Picture: Martin Ollman

The pond was reminded by another place celebrating with a vintage Wilcox, which suggested that this has been going on for years ...

The pond was beginning to feel the burden ...

What Bowen has done is at least leave some breadcrumbs on the table for what the government has in mind to meet the upgraded targets. But this is going to be a profoundly harder sell than the cataclysmic scene-setting of last week.
Taking the case of the industry sector plan – which covers aluminium, food and beverage manufacturing, metal refining and smelting, cement and concrete production, iron and steel manufacturing, paper, chemicals and plastics – the net-zero report puts off for at least a year the changes to the mechanisms the government will need to impose to drive down emissions.
Its own report admits it is highly uncertain what the outcome of all this might be. It expects the country’s industrial output will be able to be maintained, and it might in fact add to it in some cases. But it can’t really say.
“While scenario-based analysis is a powerful tool in helping inform Australia’s net-zero pathway, it is not possible to precisely predict the transition,” it says. “The future is uncertain, and many factors will influence the net-zero transition, including changes in technology, global dynamics and community responses … the decarbonisation of Australian industries will not be straightforward.”
The baseline scenarios, where everything works out for the best, assume the government and private sector have succeeded in navigating all these uncertainties together. This starts to sound like a significant political gamble with the future of manufacturing.
One of these uncertainties is what an expansion of the Safeguard Mechanism looks like. We don’t know the answer to this yet.
“To ensure they are appropriately calibrated, the Australian government will review Safeguard Mechanism policy settings in 2026-27,” the report says.
“As part of the review, the Climate Change Authority will advise the Australian government on the extent to which on-site abatement is being driven by the reforms, and whether any additional incentives are required.”
What the target implies is an expansion of the scheme to capture smaller industrial facilities will be necessary. This applies to the resources sector plan as well.

The reptiles also just love this sign, already sighted any number of times, Farmers near Cassilis, north of Mudgee, protest against transmission towers. Picture: Max Mason-Hubers

That left simpleton Simon plenty of space to carry on ...

The economic modelling that goes with the report reveals that at the heart of delivering 2035 and net zero by 2050 is a $300 carbon tax.
It is no longer called this, of course. Treasury now refers to it as a “marginal abatement incentive”. The Productivity Commission has come up with the more novel “target-consistent carbon value”.
The Treasury modelling is forecasting a $329-a-tonne carbon price by 2050 in 2024 dollar terms.
The PC modelling had it higher, at more than $400 a tonne. It is surprising the government released this modelling at all, although it didn’t go out of its way to draw anyone’s attention to it.
There are seven sector plans, including transport, electricity, agriculture and the built environment, which will have this implicit carbon price embedded into them.
When it comes to the Safeguard Mechanism, carbon leakage becomes a significant concern. Again, the report kicks the can down the road on this, promising to consider a Carbon Border Abatement Mechanism – in other words, a tariff – to address industries shutting down and moving offshore, at the same time as it reviews the Safeguard Mechanism sometime in 2026-2027.
This makes practical sense, but it creates a vacuum between then and now, which produces political vulnerability. All this – including road-user charges for heavy transport and electric vehicles, and how farmers will be forced to reduce emissions – will have to be unveiled within a year of the next election.
Sharper minds in the Coalition can already see the opportunities here. A political settlement with the electorate has not yet been achieved on the economic cost of the new target. The government should take no comfort from a Newspoll last week that suggested 37 per cent of voters supported more action on climate change. Other polls have said less than a third of people believe it will happen. The other way to read this poll was to look at the combined number of voters who wanted less action or no more than was currently employed. This number was 53 per cent.
This suggests a majority of voters are not necessarily supportive from the outset on what the government is proposing to embark on. There is an obvious precedent for how easily this could all be unwound politically through an effective scare campaign over a carbon tax. By leaving a vacuum of time between announcing the targets and the more specific mechanism changes to achieve it, the government has created political opportunity for the Coalition.
With cost of living still the priority concern for most Australians, the government cannot be complacent about the political risks in its approach.

Here, for relief, have an infallible Pope, held over from the weekend ...

Ah, they stepped out from the tent for a little while in order to water the wilderness ...

Simplistic Simon was of course just a warm up for the Caterist ...

The header: Wind energy crisis: The hidden numbers behind Australia’s renewable shock, Australia's vast landmass can't save its troubled wind industry, with developers running out of viable locations just as construction costs hit record highs.

The caption for the uncredited collage, which in its own small way was a reptile classic, what with the nightmarish windmills looming out of a darkening sky, Albo imitating the Victorian dead, and that other nonentity clutching his forehead, Anthony Albanese and Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen. One cannot help but wonder if Bowen is cradling his head in his hands, wondering how he stuffed it up so badly.

The Caterist managed his usual four minutes of climate subversion, down there with his ability as a floodwaters-in-quarry whisperer ...

There was little good news for the wind industry as delegates gathered for a joyless summit in Melbourne last week.
The cost of wind installations has doubled in recent years, while the risks to a return on capital have grown. The plight of the wind industry exposes the central flaw in Chris Bowen’s claim that renewable energy is inherently cheaper than coal.
In an intellectual sense, Bowen is right. Wind as a source of energy is technically free, while coal costs money. Yet he seems confused about the difference between energy – a raw resource – and power, energy delivered in a form that has practical application. Converting energy to power requires scarce resources, land and capital, taking us from the dreamy world of abundance into realm of economics.
Australia, the sixth-largest country in the world, is situated on the second-least populated continent. Yet wind developers are learning a lesson that farmers absorbed a couple of centuries ago: some blocks are better than others. The stock of land in windy places close to the grid is virtually exhausted, forcing developers further afield. They have ventured further north into un-farmed parts of the Great Dividing Range, where topography and distance increase construction costs. The threat to biodiversity adds to the cost of compliance.
Understandably, banks have become reluctant to invest. The total number of turbine developments the banks have agreed to back in 2025 is zero. Historically, the renewable generation business model relied not just on the sale of electricity but on trading the Large-scale Generation Certificates that came as a bonus.
With the 2030 closure of the Renewable Energy Target scheme in sight, however, LGC prices are in free fall. Spot prices have fallen from $42 a year ago to around $12 today. Forward trades for 2029 are hovering around $6.
Regulatory risk, the prospect of delays and uncertainty about the market’s trajectory heap misgivings on top of uncertainty. It is little wonder investors seeking to enhance their ESG credentials have been turning to solar and batteries, where the engineering and logistics are simpler and costs increasingly competitive.

The pond asked it before, and now asks it again, is there ever a reptile climate denialist/renewables energy bashing story to hand in the lizard Oz that isn't accompanied by a terrifying, truly frightening snap of windmills busy killing whales? Sho'nuff, The plight of the wind industry exposes the central flaw in Chris Bowen’s claim that renewable energy is inherently cheaper than coal. Picture: AFP

The pond doesn't mean to argue, but simply to save correspondents the time and bother of having to head off to the archive ...

Prudence is a cardinal virtue in banking. In politics, less so. As banks walk away from wind in search of safer investment opportunities, the government steps in, offering to underwrite through its Capacity Investment Scheme.
The CIS is a no-win solution for Australians who end up paying for more expensive electricity through their power bills or taxes. If wholesale prices fall beneath the agreed threshold, the government will be obliged to top up private profits from the public purse.
Bankers aren’t the only people who have fallen out of love with wind. The big gen-tailers have, too. When their turbines are turning, they can be sure that those of their competitors are too, creating a glut that lowers spot prices, frequently into negative territory. That in turn reduces the profitability of the other generators in their portfolio, notably coal.
Bowen’s hopes of finding relief by moving the wind energy generation offshore are receding.
On Tuesday, Jacinta Allan disappointed delegates at the summit by announcing that the auction for tenders for the state’s first offshore wind plant had been postponed. Escalating costs, supply chain pressures and risk aversion have increased reluctance to bid at similar auctions in Europe.
You don’t have to be an economically conservative net-zero sceptic to conclude that 200m-high, 1000-tonne dinosaurs wedged in 800 cubic metres of concrete have had their day. Peter Cowling is a former Clean Energy Council chair. He describes himself on LinkedIn as “a passionate believer in renewable energy” and “a problem solver”. Yet even Cowling seems to be struggling to see a way through for wind, warning last week that the sector faced “an existential challenge” in the competition for capital with solar and batteries.
Labor’s fetish for flogging dead horses should never be overlooked. Yet if we haven’t crossed peak turbine threshold already, we will long before we arrive at peak coal or peak gas. The ambition to install 40 7.5MW wind turbines a month turned out to be less achievable than the government hoped. Since he announced that target three years ago, the monthly average is around 20. None have been as big as 7.5MW. The average capacity is 4.9MW, which is one of the reasons we’ll end up a long way short of Bowen’s 2030 target of 82 per cent carbon-free power.
Who knows what goes on behind closed doors, but one cannot help but wonder if Bowen is cradling his head in his hands, wondering how he stuffed it up so badly. The soaring cost of transmission lines and the glacial pace of approvals must be driving him to distraction. He must be kicking himself imagining that the answer to almost everything was green hydrogen, the molecule of broken dreams.
Which leads us to ask what else he has up his sleeve to justify his apparent confidence that his ambitious 62-70 per cent emissions target for 2035 can be achieved. After all, the modest reductions in emissions from energy generation under Labor’s watch represent the tiniest bite at low-hanging fruit. How will Bowen begin to tackle the two-thirds of emissions that come from transport, agriculture and other hard-to-abate sectors?

Of course the pond could have drawn attention to exquisite ironies such as the cratering Caterist referring to a fetish for flogging dead horses - still no SMR in the pond's back yard - but it's enough to note the ongoing visual flogging of hapless Sussssan with this cruel juxtaposition, Liberal Party leader Sussan Ley. Picture: NewsWire/David Crosling, Former prime minister Robert Menzies.

The reptiles really are doing their best to give that lettuce every break ...

As for the closing, it was just the usual Caterist claptrap, catnip for the climate science denialists and renewable energy bashers in the coalition ... you know the sort ...

Carry on cratering the planet, careening, carousing Caterist ...

For Labor, however, it is all about bravado. Labor isn’t looking for the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions. It’s looking for the cheapest way to win elections. The sweet spot isn’t a policy that fixes things. It’s a policy that promises enough to satisfy catastrophists and provides ammunition to attack the opposition.
That’s not a big ask these days since the Liberal Party effectively has no climate or energy policy. Theoretically, a year-long review of the opposition’s platform would be a wonderful thing at a time when the formation of serious policy is a dying art. Yet oppositions have seldom enjoyed that luxury in a three-year cycle.
Leader Sussan Ley must establish herself quickly as a conviction politician in the spirit of Robert Menzies, a leader who was less concerned about opinion polls than in what he could achieve for country. Ley must state a position and argue for it until she runs out of breath. If the Coalition sticks with net zero, it must tell the Australian public how it can be practically achieved. If it wants to abandon it, it must be able to argue why. Fantasy policies may be good enough for Labor. But they are anathema in the party of Menzies.

Whenever a reptile columnist resorts to the notion that a politician must do what they say, and invokes the 1950s, you know that the odds on the lettuce are shortening to impossible odds ...

It's a bit like the discounts King Donald is continuing to offer on drug prices ... 

He's been doing it for ages, and repeated this sort of stuff over the weekend (a new title, King Chuck the Conqueror also scored airtime) ...

"Well, one of the things they're going to be talking about pretty soon are the tremendous drop in drug prices. You know, we've cut drug prices by 1,200, 1,300, 1,400, 1,500 percent. I don't mean 50 percent. I mean 14-, 1,500 percent," the president said.

Some pedants keep banging on about the calculations, but the online calculator was fine with it ...

Welcome to the United States (if you can get past the border police), where the drug companies pay you squillions to consume their drugs ...

What a nirvana, what a paradise, though perhaps Rowe should be apologising to Marlon and Francis as much as Conrad ...