Labor’s energy plan will cost ‘$1.5 trillion’: David Littleproud
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 06. 2024
- Nationals leader David Littleproud has slammed the Albanese government over its energy plan which will cost “$1.5 trillion”.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton announced the Coalition’s nuclear plan last week.
“It’s $1.5 trillion, and that’s Net Zero Australia who's articulated those numbers,” Mr Littleproud told Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell.
“Then $7 to $9 trillion between 2060.
“That’s why we’re saying we don’t just want to leave a legacy that just doesn’t last 15 to 20 years.
“We want something that’ll last 80 to 100 years.”
Albanese should just resign he makes me I'll just hearing the lies come from his mouth now. Worst pm ever. Has ruined and divided our beautiful country.
I agree, but on the other hand better if he stays to ensure Labor sinks even lower as we approach the next election.
YES!!! we've got you, Peter Dutton. The country is watching.
So you support a corrupt politician who's going to sell more of australia to America
Thanks ya tosser
Shows you have no idea 😂
$1.5 TRILLION for something that doesn't work & sending Australians to poverty. I'll take $387 billion anyday for low cost nuclear energy & guaranteed energy supply.
Totally agree. Bowen wants to get a Nobel prize for being the first one in the world to get a country totally on renewable. He's as evil as he looks
You're right in saying "aust's to poverty". ABS data concludes that the Govt sector(nations revenue consumers) has successfully economically enslaved a largely disarmed civilian population (nations revenue producers)on a gearing of 1:1.60 against(not incl military in govt sector). And the divergence is/has been accelerating at a most alarming & offensive rate and far beyond global parity tolerances.
And we own something again would be nice instead of being owned.
However that's for when you'll be fifteen years older , but your kids.will love it .
But that's if things go smoothly for construction.
Preach it 🙏
You want to believe anything that incompetent Albo says???
Give me a spell!!
Also sounds far more competent then Dutton sorry I mean voldemort
I think you've gotts loom at their talk time in parliment, Dutton gets wiped constantly, he's a tosser
Dutton for P.M.
ABSOLUTELY!👍
Sack Labor!!!!
I'm with Dutton. Clennel is a terrible interviewer unless its a Labor member.
We have been saying for months and months...and he says it with a sneer
Of course, because he is a one-eyed Labour supporter. If you want someone who is worse, try Sarah Ferguson of the ABC {Australia’s Biased Current Affairs}.
Dutton is a tosser and will sell your country to America as liberals have been doing for the past few decades
GRUBBY ALBO DIDN'T MIND SPENDING MILLIONS ON THE VOICE!!
It wasn't millions he spent it was hundreds of millions, as in at least 450 million.
About time Dutton DEMANDED a full cost accounting for the "renewables over a hundred years of operation.
Bruh. The coalition hasn’t even released costing for the year 0 of their strategy, let alone year 100
@@6braceface find any negative you can mate doesn’t make labor right
@@6bracefacetypical brain dead comment.
Even if we ignore the fact that this a brand new policy vs a policy Labor has been gibbering on about for years without releasing the true costs, the full cost of both plans need to be compared over 100 years
Powering Australia with nothing but wind and solar over 100 years would incur infinite costs.
@@6braceface Bruh spending trillions to link solar farms and wind farms makes no sense. Let's see Labour's costing and plan for full baseload power.
Clennel you are such a negative interviewer looks like you’re on labor’s payroll
Agree
If it is safe reliable, sustainable, creates job opportunities , cheaper energy bills and keeps the light on 24hrs. Why not ? 🙏
Because they want a state of *_permanent-blackout._*
Seriously it's 4 CENTS a Kilowatt over Seas. And we are paying a Fortune for Energy For IDEAOLOGY.
$387 billion spread over a century is better than $1.5 trillion spread over a couple of decades!
Its not just that, Nuclear can provide baseload power 24/7 whereas renewables can't.
A century? You really believe that?
@@indiathylane2158 even if it's only over 30 years, it's still cheaper...
@@timewastemaster Waiting for proven, reliable figures from both sides. Not seen them yet.
$387 billion is just for the nuclear part and due to size it will only generate 3.7% of our needs by 2050.
Who do you believe, Tanya or David? Logic reason and calm debate - David everyday! 8 billion per reactor (56billion) total cost far better than 1.5trillion. Honesty and transparency is not Labor, just petty childish gibberish.
Plus renewables have a life span of 10 years then you have to replace them and what do you do with the old gear ? I would like to know that before I die my children and grandchildren will have power !!!!! Go for Nuclear power.
What has Tanya ever done in decades of being in parliament?
But that doesn't cover 100% energy generation that is only for about 4%. Total if all nuclear could be close to 5 to 10 trillion
Surprised and happy the LNP party is championing public power. Normally a socialist policy.
@stewartbrooker not socialist at all for government to provide infrastructure
What’s 1.5 trillion dollars.? To Labor it means “the workers “ will have work harder to pay for it.
Again this inview seen to hammer littleproud but let off Labor losers get off so easy he dont ask the hard questions to them .
Littleproud did brilliantly
I am so tied of this green energy B.S I'd like to see 10 coal fired power stations built over the next 10 years that will give a good low cost base load power supply. This Green energy isn't green atall . The mining and smelting is polluting the air and new power lines are destroying our food supply . In America am Australian cobalt mining company has been giving the green light to mine this crap at the expense of 1000s of acres of food growers in Idaho.
Brother hi five lol I agree coal is proven and china ain't going to blow up any of their coal power plants so why are we bothering with the little emissions we put out.
Try harder. The CFMEU haven’t got their grubby paws on it yet. What is the overrun multiplier Albanese and his mates bring to costs? Has to be at least 10X.
This policy approach asks the question. Do you want accessible, affordable baseload energy, less carbon emissions, less damage to our pristine wilderness and farmland? Yes or No.
Better send the memo to Bowen he doesn't know 🥴
And make sure labour cannot sell it afterwards to balance their deficits and line their pockets 🧐
Yep, just labor does that. Right.
Well said Peter Dutton Albo is a child in a man’s body. The CCP said Albo is a handsome boy. 👍👍👍👍👍
David, please let Liebor know what their plan will cost, because they obviously don't know how to calculate it!
BRING IT ON!! Peter Dutton .
Providing constant electrical power into the grid is not easy. The "grid" consists of high voltage transmission lines, transformers and array of substations to divide and handle generated electricity from power stations. Power stations have to guarantee a constant supply (without fluctuations) into the grid network 24/7 365 days of the year. They also have to maintain a "base load" to allow for lean off periods and high demand (ensuring the tank is always full).
Hey pollies- Natural Gas is ours - start owning it and charging Australians correctly not letting overseas firms decide what we pay. Claim what belongs to us NOW.
If I recall correctly, we had a PM that wanted to Nationalise our resources about 50 odd years ago.
Given the vested interests of the largest US petrochem corporations, whom lobby the US Government in such situstions, and private investment by the Royal Family in a lucrative extraction company which I believe is now called Rio Tinto; They more or less applied a soft Coup to said PM's Government for daring to suggest such a thing.
The official from the US Government said to the newly installed PM that "The US will never AGAIN interfere with Australian Politics".
Liebor doesn't have an energy plan, instead they have a wish list dream.
1.5 trillion for renewables or 387 billion for nuclear. Mmm a 1.2 trillion dollar saving for nuclear, would build a hell of a lot of hospitals, schools, houses, roads ect.
man littleproud has absolutely ratcheted up the ladder and is absolutely kicking ass
We are in all sorts of trouble with these muppets calling the shots
Bet the media especially ABC won’t report this
Australia is losing the war against carbon.
Why? Plants need it.
Great interview Andrew. I’ve got to give you 10 points for trying to get the cost out of him. Go David and Peter…
US annual interest bill. Nothing to worry about.
Yes Yes YES Peter Dutton do it and Australia should own it
The way Australians have dumped coal, shows how stupid we have become
I'm a coalition voter but won't be voting for Labor plant coalition opposition leader in QLD. Like Archer in Tassie , Keane in NSW and the piece of bacon in VIC plus Birmingham and other Lino's , go join your mates in Labor Greens and Teals. We conservative voters deserve better
You're right. Crisafulli is not a leader, nor does he represent conservatives, yet he is still a better bet than The Giggler Miles. Go with One Nation! Preference all other conservative independents below that, but make sure you know where their alliances and own preferences go... not to Labor or the Greens! We must end up controlling who gets in government like the wicked Greens do now. We can do it.
Why not keep the coal power stations going, and keep the coal in our country instead of exporting it.
Too much common sense. I’m with you, I find it just unbelievable levels of stupidity
The only solar being installed should go on the roofs of residential, industrial and commercial buildings. Wasting precious land on solar farms and wind turbines is NOT needed. All other power should come from Nuclear power stations as they are long term, not short like wind and solar. Nuclear offers consistent and reliable base power at zero emissions and the high level waste produced, whilst extremely small, will one day be able to be re-used leaving a very small footprint for future generations.
This is a no brainer - $387bn is chicken feed compared to “renewables” which haven’t lowered power prices in 50 years.
What an insult to our submarine crews by Albo. Is he going to apologise to our defence personnel?
Generations of politicians have been destroying Australia. We should be in a better position than what we are experiencing.
Why is labour demanding costs for nuclear ☢️ from libs and nationals when labour hasn’t informed the Australian community about the cost of their renewable energy
Glad to hear Aussies will own the nuclear assets
And if WA chooses to become Independent from Aust C'wealth, as some strategic geo-political analysts beyond our Nat'l borders consider is far far more likely than an Aust Republic and a whole lot sooner than later, where are you all gonna get the money to bankroll it? If the Aust Institute is right 80% of Aust Nat'l export earnings annually is from WA Toil.
This is the best plan from the government in years to move our country forward and we need to build our assets and this is a great start for the country 👍👍🇦🇺
1.5 trillion for a crappy weak product
I think that David is a little proud of this proposal, as he should be 😀
Just sack Bowen. Then we will all be better off.
Dotton got my vote let’s look after children and they children
I anticipate that in the not-too-distant future, a vast number of unused Chinese solar and wind turbines, valued at trillions of dollars, will be dismantled and dumped somewhere, resulting in environmental damage and chemical pollution on a scale that Australia has never experienced. This is because renewable energy sources will prove to be ineffective, and nuclear power will ultimately become the primary source of reliable and affordable power. Renewable energy sources will be rendered obsolete and therefore dumped.
And the rest!!!
any time governments quote a figure for a project, you multiply it by four, there are many snouts in the trough
A widely dispersed advertising campaign, showing the hideous blight that is industrial-scale wind turbine and silicon panel installations, should help Aussie voters send the Labor muppets on their way.
Some one should set up #hideous blight on social media where Australians can send photos to to show what is being done in their area and the destruction of the environment and wildlife habitats
How 19 countries find nuclear profil profitable but Labor in Australia can't see it ,why???🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 5:08
So if the costing is the same as Snowy 11. The so-called renewables cost will quadruple in price.
Go Lnp. Labor are gone
I like the idea of all Aussies owning the base-load power stations that energize Australia... the way it used to be. Because of the nuclear factor, definitely federally owned in this instance.
More taxes on Super and Medicare Levy to 5%. Thanks Labor.
Blowout on past projects indicate more like five trilon.
Love it when comments made by reporters make it sound like a dumb person is asking a question but I can see the need. Have to convince the less educated in our society and that means thinking like a Labor socialist
Update.
Thanks to Leader Littleproud We have People in Central QLD Who Think a COAL MINE Costs Less than a SOLAR POWER STATION.
Then When You ask Them what does a Dragline, Coal Truck, Coal Pre Plant, Long Wall Cost to BUY ?.
They Don't Know!.
Then When You ask Them what does a Dragline, Coal Truck, Coal Pre Plant, Long Wall Cost to RUN ?.
They Don't Know!.
Then When You ask Them what does a COAL TRAIN, a COAL SHIP Cost to Buy.
They Don't Know!.
Then When You ask Them what does a COAL TRAIN, a COAL SHIP Cost to Run.
They Don't Know!.
Solar panels and the east coast's fantastic hail storms wow thats gunna be as funny as f-all !
That comentater needs to go.
Good stuff! And move forward, no more bending for trends, leadership Nats and Libs ! 👍
How about a senate inquiry into the renewables scam...
can we return the renewable products to chyna and ask for money back?
Wish Clennel would grill Bowen about the cost of labour’s ridiculous net zero after 2yrs nobody knows and what we all know is isn’t working and nowhere ready and for all this ridiculous cost already labour couldn’t run a school tuck shop
Really well spoken, really good upfront conversation. Confidence and made an absolute decision, your career is on the line and still you put it out there, thankyou, keep going!
Labor misleading about costing, definitely 🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 1:57
Voters, the people of Australia , like upfront political policy ,definitely 🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 8:24
I live in a caravan that depends on solar when I get overcast days I run a generator you can not depend on solar or wind to survive always need other power sources
What are the compensation cost for additional poles and wires under labour plan and what is the ongoing operation cost for solar panels? We know the wind turbines are costing $600k per year each turbine to lease and farmers get 12k per year turbine all cost and duration of lifespan needs to be taken into account but the national owned asset of energy sounds good in terms of both national and sovereign interest.
Labor talking about costing, give me a brake, please 🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 3:54
renewable profit for mates and ecological disaster
Member Birmingham Must Explain Why He did Not Achieve GREEN STEEL, GREEN COPPER for South Australia when He was in Government ?.
The upfront capital cost is no different (financially) to giving a foreign national an annuity dividend for 20 years - that’s how annuities work.
Great interview, nuclear makes so much sense .
To start with, the only way these generators will be built on time and on budget is to exclude Trade Union interference. We cannot accept the Union bastadry that always plagues large significant developments. That’s why construction and management by the Commonwealth is the only way to go.
The press is obsessed with finding out the cost but overlooks the reality that with Nuclear there are two components to nuclear costings. The first is the build cost which is amortised over the life of the plant - 80 to 100 years. The second is the generation cost which then translates into customers electricity bills. This is going to be about 1/3 the cost of current electricity generation using inefficient renewable systems that cost customers greatly because they are inefficient and intermittent.
As cor solar subsidies, we are already seeing the wind back on feed-in tariffs towards fee-in fees then it would be obvious that solar panels on ordinary citizens roofs is now reaching the end of its expansion.
a plan for 100 years. yeh good
Snowy hydro was $2b and now over $12b and hardly started. Give me Nuclear as the solar and wind renewables are only short lifecycle systems that will not support the long term sustainability of Australian business. Why are the Greens supporting the destruction of our farmland and forests when Nuclear is a viable alternative that is recognised internationally. Time for bipartisan cooperation in the interests of Australians instead of perpetuating divisive political stances.
Renewables would likely work fine if Australian population remained at ~~ 25million but with ½ million immigration into Australia per year , then we gotta plan for a population of at least 50 million by 2040 and still growing. Only nuclear can service such a high population.
Wind and/or solar can't even power a factory, much less a country.
Andrew Clennell could be more credible if he tried being a little less combative.
Its is only tax payers money ...Houses will need to become self sufficent in all areas, saving wires, sub station and transformers. Only heavy power business requiring power at this point. We need to think out side the BOX.
The defending is electric ⚡ haha get it😅
Who gave Mitsubishi 200 million to keep them in Australia only to exit the nect yr?
Who's back an open cut coal mine just north of Bundaberg on prime farming land and cutting thru the kolan river??
7900 hectares??
The on.y reference I saw was a Bloomberg article suggesting net zero would cost about 1.9 trillion but most of this would be private investors keen to make profit from a financially rewarding investment. Duttons plans would NEED to be fully funded by the government as the returns would be unattractive to private investors.
Well, as for private investors keen to make a profit, Labor spokespeople are currently blaming the high cost of power on Energy Companies profit gauging, to counter the claim that the cost of renewables is driving up prices.
If that's the case why should we believe that Energy Co's WON'T continue with that practice when they invest in all renewables?
We need to focus on the whole of life benefit to Australia, and what income to build the plants stays in Australia. Sometimes Economics fails to consider the best interest of the Australian people. It is not always about an IRR, ROI etc calculation.
2:30 all renewables but includes gas? How can it be all renewables then? Don't tell me this is just a slogan!
Gas is baseload until nuclear is built
It would be better to conserve the gas for industry use . Australian start-up ventures have to move to America due to high cost of gas in Australia. But at least ½ million immigration brings some revenue into Australia and helps fuel the property speculation industry..
Agrivolatics actually increases field yield
You mean like conocophillips who Johnny Howard sold out Australias gas to??
Bring nuclear on! Boot this Labor/ Greens and Teals out at the next election, and let's get Australia back on track again!! A
I whis this joker would question the Labor with the same manner
Surprised and happy the LNP party is championing public power. Normally a socialist policy.
Definitely, with responsibility and accountability management, why not, a winner, definitely 🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 10:24
Simon Birmingham always seems a little weak to me. I think the Libs can do better.
TALKS BS
I do totally agree with Mr David, definitely 🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 2:25
CSRIO somtimes , in the past , used to make numbers for Labor political arguments, why???🤗🌎🐖💯🇦🇺👍🇺🇸❤️ 6:28
CSIRO predict a 15 year build largely because our planning red tape (especially re nuclear) slow it down relative to international experience. Assuming we adopt international best practice there’s no reason they couldn’t be built in a fraction of the time.
The Illinois University professor explains the typical nuclear power plant costs over the decades of construction and service life etc. using a blackboard, actually not a blackboard but close enough.