Essential Research: 53-47 to Labor

After a bit of a blip over the past month or so, Essential Research finds Labor’s recovering its solid post-election lead.

The latest fortnightly rolling average of federal voting intention for Essential Research returns Labor’s two-party lead to 53-47, after walking a point at a time from 53-47 four weeks ago to 51-49 a fortnight ago and now back again. Both major parties are now at 37% on the primary vote, with the Coalition down one and Labor up one, while One Nation comes off a point from last week’s high to 7%, with the Greens and Nick Xenophon Team steady at 9% and 3%. The poll also features its monthly leadership ratings, which have Malcolm Turnbull down two on approval to 34% and up two on disapproval to 46%, while Bill Shorten is respectively up one to 35% and, oddly, down five to 38%. Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister is now at 39-28, down from 40-28, leaving for a remarkably high “don’t know” remainder. The most interesting of the survey’s remaining findings is the overwhelming support recorded for an increase in the minimum wage, with 80% approving and 11% disapproving. Another question canvases whether respondents would be “likely” to vote for a new conservative party formed around the likes of Tony Abbott, for which 23% answered in the affirmative, although polling exercises of this kind have shown themselves to be of very little value in the past.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,620 comments on “Essential Research: 53-47 to Labor”

Comments Page 30 of 33
1 … 29 30 31 … 33

  1. briefly @ #1444 Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 10:58 pm

    P1 is arguing that because we don’t heave enough RE we should aspire to have less rather than more and, furthermore, that we should find ways to segregate RE from the grid – to make investment in RE less attractive than it would otherwise be.

    You are so determined to find fault that you continue to completely miss the point. I am in favor of solar. I am just not in favor of using it to prop up a failed model of electricity distribution that has led us to where we are now, because for too long it has allowed fossil fuel companies to privatize the profits and socialize the losses associated with electricity generation.

    If you want to stay on the grid, you should pay the true grid price – which is not 10 or 20c per KwH. It should be at least 10 times that.

  2. Player One
    so I believe my original arguments still stand

    Nope:

    It is important to use some caution in interpreting the bioenergy numbers in Figures 10.8 and 10.9 relative to those associated with the other renewable energy technologies. This analysis is being conducted using the direct equivalent accounting method. Bioenergy is accounted for prior to conversion to fuels such as ethanol or electricity when it is used in those applications. In contrast, the other technologies generally produce electricity, and they are accounted for as electricity produced in these cases. If they were to be converted to primary energy by using the substitution method, then they might be roughly three times larger, based on average fossil electricity efficiencies.

  3. JimmyDoyle

    The ideal, and in my view most likely, scenario is for renewable energy to replace coal and oil as the planet’s primary energy source, and for CCS and geoengineering to reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

    Now that I understand your definition of “renewable energy” includes bioenergy then I can agree this is a desirable outcome – I am just not so confident it is likely to happen in practice.

  5. JimmyDoyle

    In contrast, the other technologies generally produce electricity, and they are accounted for as electricity produced in these cases. If they were to be converted to primary energy by using the substitution method, then they might be roughly three times larger, based on average fossil electricity efficiencies.

    Still not as high as bioenergy, so still just a minor contribution to renewables overall, and still just a minor contribution to the overall energy mix.

  6. PlayerOne – In other words bioenergy is not being accounted for as electricity, whereas solar and wind are. The ramification of that is that burning biofuels to produce electricity doesn’t produce much electricity – photovoltaics are far and away more efficient at energy conversion.

  8. PlayerOne
    Still not as high as bioenergy, so still just a minor contribution to renewables overall, and still just a minor contribution to the overall energy mix.

    LOL nope. On page 809 the authors show that scenarios looking to maintain carbon dioxide below 440ppm averaged out with solar and wind alone coming close to 50% of the total electricity supply by 2050.

  9. Player One
    Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 11:31 pm

    …..for too long it has allowed fossil fuel companies to privatize the profits and socialize the losses associated with electricity generation.

    This has nothing to do with the grid. It arises because emissions are not priced. Pricing emissions would impel changes to generation technologies. The existence of the grid would lower the cost of those technologies and accelerate their return.

    Ho hum.

  11. jimmydoyle @ #1456 Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 11:50 pm

    PlayerOne – In other words bioenergy is not being accounted for as electricity, whereas solar and wind are. The ramification of that is that burning biofuels to produce electricity doesn’t produce much electricity – photovoltaics are far and away more efficient at energy conversion.

    Yes, I know. That’s why solar is better at reducing C02 emissions than bio. Doesn’t change the fact that even with the “three times” factor thrown in, more renewable energy is projected to come from bio than solar. Or wind. Or hydro. Or geothermal. It would be easier if we had the actual numbers, not just a graph – but it looks to me like only about 1/3 of the renewable energy contribution is actually from solar.

    And I think (from memory, haven’t checked) that even the best scenario only has about 50% of all energy coming from renewables, so maybe 15% from solar?

  13. I shudder to imagine the ON Senate replacement we’ll get in the wake of Cullerton.

    Well, he’s not resigning from the Senate, so it seems to me the two most likely outcomes at the moment are:
    * the HC says he shouldn’t have been a candidate, in which case they are most likely to order a recount which would give us his brother-in-law (I think?) who was next on the PHON ticket in WA, or
    * the HC decides to give him a pass, and he stays as the PHON gift that, while independent, keeps giving.

    Of course if he’s convicted of something else and has to resign from the Senate then PHON gets to choose a replacement, but … even given Culleton being the ratbag he is it is unlikely the wheels of justice would move quickly enough to see that happen in the next 2 and a half years.

  14. confessions @ #1457 Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 11:55 pm

    I shudder to imagine the ON Senate replacement we’ll get in the wake of Cullerton.

    If Culleton is disqualified you might be pleasantly surprised:
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/meet-one-nations-replacement-senate-candidate-peter-georgiou-20161104-gsi1xy.html

    If he is not disqualified from the start but later becomes ineligible (eg is declared bankrupt) then it would be the supposedly rogue WA branch that would nominate his replacement.

  15. PlayerOne – furthermore, if you go to page 814, one of the scenarios selected by the authors has renewable energy providing 77% of all electricity by 2050.

  16. briefly @ #1459 Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 11:58 pm

    …..for too long it has allowed fossil fuel companies to privatize the profits and socialize the losses associated with electricity generation.

    This has nothing to do with the grid. It arises because emissions are not priced.

    The grid is what allowed emissions to go unpriced for so long. And it is still doing so, even though we now know the true cost.

  17. jimmydoyle @ #1465 Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:06 am

    PlayerOne – furthermore, if you go to page 814, one of the scenarios selected by the authors has renewable energy providing 77% of all electricity by 2050.

    Which would be about 25% solar. I don’t know that scenario, but do you also notice that the population is the among the largest, but the energy demand is the lowest? This means the energy demand per capita is the smallest possible – way below all the other scenarios. This is apparently a model that applies to a very low growth (read: poor) economy. Maybe it is realistic. Maybe not.

    But this is actually the other point of many of my posts today – i.e. we need to change people’s behavior more than we need to change the cost of solar.

  18. Emissions are unpriced because of political decisions, not because of the existence of poles and wires.

    In WA, we want the State to hold on to the grid because then we can use it drive changes in the technologies and market forces that drive energy production and exchange.

  19. Player One
    Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:21 am

    But this is actually the other point of many of my posts today – i.e. we need to change people’s behavior more than we need to change the cost of solar.

    This is absolutely mistaken. We need to change the price and the technologies of electricity supply. We can then bring about further improvements in living standards, real incomes, employment opportunities…and so on…

  20. PlayerOne, I agree that behaviour around energy use has to change, but that is beside the point. This is what you said about renewables on the previous page:

    all the scenarios modelled show they play some role. But in most scenarios it is minor. They certainly cannot provide “most or all” of our future energy supplies.

    Everything I’ve posted from the IPCC reports contradicts that assertion – their scenarios have solar and wind providing between 31% and 77% of all electricity in 2050. Are you going to withdraw it?

  21. briefly @ #1469 Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:31 am

    Player One
    Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:21 am
    But this is actually the other point of many of my posts today – i.e. we need to change people’s behavior more than we need to change the cost of solar.
    This is absolutely mistaken. We need to change the price and the technologies of electricity supply. We can then bring about further improvements in living standards, real incomes, employment opportunities…and so on…

    That’s all very nice – but it is all beside the point. The point is to minimize C02 emissions. If we just wanted to reduce the cost of supply, we would just continue to burn coal. Also, since we have so much cheap coal, we should lay undersea power cables to all our neighbors so that we can do it ever more efficiently and make a real killing.

  22. jimmydoyle @ #1470 Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:36 am

    PlayerOne, I agree that behaviour around energy use has to change, but that is beside the point. This is what you said about renewables on the previous page:

    all the scenarios modelled show they play some role. But in most scenarios it is minor. They certainly cannot provide “most or all” of our future energy supplies.

    Everything I’ve posted from the IPCC reports contradicts that assertion – their scenarios have solar and wind providing between 31% and 77% of all electricity in 2050. Are you going to withdraw it?

    Hang on a minute! – the 77% figure is the energy generated from all renewables – i.e. bio, solar, wind, geothermal and hydro. From page 831:

    The overall share of RE in primary energy demand within the three in-depth
    mitigation scenario ranges from 24% (MiniCAM-EMF22) to 39% (ER-2010)
    by 2030 and 31% (MiniCAM-EMF22) to 77% (ER-2010) by 2050.

    The contribution to that 77% from solar is about 1/3 of the total contribution of renewables, so about 25% of the total energy demand.

    So, as I said – not “most or all” – just “minor”.

  23. Player One
    Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:36 am

    This is wrong. There is already plenty of unused coal-fired capacity. If you want to reduce the cost of electricity, the path is to continue to improve and expand renewable processes and systems. This could be intensified and accelerated if emissions were priced. You seem to be prepared to drive up the cost of electricity while evading the pricing of emissions. You want to thwart both demand (driving up the price) and supply (disabling the grid). These are not solutions. They are crack-pottery.

    But enough.

  24. PlayerOne – yes you’re right, I should’ve said renewables, not just solar and wind (which in my head are interchangeable). However, as we discussed earlier, biofuels are not, and never will be, a major component of electricity generation. Furthermore, 25% of all electricity is not minor. And the larger point remains – you said renewables (not just solar) would neve be able to provide most , or all, of our electricity (opposed to energy – where biofuels may have some role, e.g. in transportation) – this is categorically wrong.

  25. I’m retiring to this….

    “Sing, O Goddess, the anger of Achilles, son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans.”

  26. jimmydoyle @ #1474 Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:58 am

    PlayerOne – yes you’re right, I should’ve said renewables, not just solar and wind (which in my head are interchangeable). However, as we discussed earlier, biofuels are not, and never will be, a major component of electricity generation. Furthermore, 25% of all electricity is not minor. And the larger point remains – you said renewables (not just solar) would neve be able to provide most , or all, of our electricity (opposed to energy – where biofuels may have some role, e.g. in transportation) – this is categorically wrong.

    It’s getting too late at night, and I’ve had too many glasses of wine!

    If renewables make 77% of all energy, and this includes bio, then we are not just talking electricity. We are also talking heating, transport etc. Maybe there’s a way to isolate the figures we have down into “just” electricity, but I can’t see how this would reach 50%.

    So maybe not “minor”, but definitely not “most or all”.

  27. P1
    Look up Dunning–Kruger effect. You stand alone claiming buried in the IPCC report is something that is clearly nonsense. It should be a hint.

  29. Rod Culleton doesn’t miss Pauline in his FU resignation letter. He also points out how PHON have sold out their election platform to curry favour with the Turnbull government. And James Ashby emerging as the svengali dalang behind the leader.

    “Policy decisions have been run in morning media, with no consultation, discussion or agreement from the party room and personal attacks and undermining, un-Australian behaviour towards myself and my team, has been ongoing and terms dictated to the team,” Senator Culleton said in a statement.

    “I can no longer tolerate the lack of party support for my positive initiatives, including the recent abandonment of PHON’s pre-election commitment to a banking royal commission.

    “Since my election to the Senate, I have consistently remained committed to all of the policies and pre-election promises, however my PHON Senate colleague’s public record, shows they have not.”

    The WA senator accused Senator Hanson of “public rants” against him and “irrational dictates” that caused “disunity and distrust” within the party.

    “I would have thought it reasonable to expect some measure of support or at the very least, some discretion and respect from the party leader and my party colleagues – there has been none,” he said.

    He accused Senator Hanson and her chief of staff of trying to force him to resign and wielding control over his office.

    “The PHON leader’s rants against me have been accompanied by demands for my resignation and control over diaries, office management and staffing by Senator Hanson and her chief of staff, James Ashby,” he said. “The irrational dictates have caused only distrust and disunity.”

  32. frednk @ #1477 Monday, December 19, 2016 at 5:56 am

    You stand alone claiming buried in the IPCC report is something that is clearly nonsense.

    Perhaps you should actually read some of it? “Buried” in that report is the minor detail that the scenario under discussion – which is the only one that has a major component of energy (77%) from renewables (and by the way this is mostly bio, not solar) – also assumed rising fossil fuel prices and the implementation of a worldwide carbon price from 2010. From page 815:

    “The ER-2010 scenario … assumes an increase in fossil fuel costs and a price for carbon from 2010 onwards”

    And guess what? Neither of those things happened in 2010, and neither is likely to happen by 2020 either … especially not if people believe that the reducing price of solar is a “magic fix” that is going to save them.

    I think we’re back to where we started. I hope you learned something along the way.

  34. Only 39% of people aged 20-24 now work full-time – down from 44% when the LNP won the 2013 election and well down on the 54% employed full-time before the global financial crisis.

    Tell me about it! On the other hand, don’t as I know from first hand experience how bloody hard it is for 20-24 year olds to get a job. Even if they have a shed load of qualifications. As a matter of fact we are off to a virtual cattle call this morning for a handful of Part Time jobs a local business is offering. But even that is better than unemployment for a dispirited young man.

    Fingers crossed!

  35. Good morning Dawn Patrollers.

    Treasurer Scott Morrison has urged Australia to confront the “air of unreality” about the size of its budgetary problems which could see the country lose its prized AAA credit rating as early as today following the release of the mid-year budget update. Stand by for an avalanche of weasel words and blaming Labor today!
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/aaa-credit-rating-hanging-in-the-balance-as-government-delivers-midyear-budget-update-20161218-gtdgqz.html
    Meanwhile the Australia Institute says treasurer must tax more, not cut business taxes, in lead-up to mid-year economic update.
    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/dec/19/scott-morrison-prepares-ground-for-budget-deterioration-blaming-labor
    Greg Jericho says that even though the MYEFO might cost us our AAA rating the Coalition facs greater dangers. Given the LNP has now been in power for more than three years, it is getting rather tough to lay the blame on the previous government.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/18/even-though-myefo-figures-might-cost-us-our-aaa-rating-the-coalition-faces-greater-dangers
    Jackson Stiles tells us what to expect from today’s MYEFO.
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/finance-news/2016/12/18/myefo-what-to-expect/
    And Urban Wronski has its say on the matter.
    https://urbanwronski.com/2016/12/18/an-anti-christmas-spirit-as-turnbull-government-richly-rewards-its-own-wages-war-on-the-rest-of-us/
    Trump’s Secretary of State Rex Tillerson conflicted? No, Never!
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/18/leak-rex-tillerson-director-bahamas-based-us-russian-oil-company
    A majority of American voters favor delaying the Electoral College vote scheduled for Monday until electors can be fully briefed on Russian interference in the election, according to a new poll conducted by YouGov.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/12/18/majority-want-mondays-electoral-college-vote-postponed-in-wake/?utm_hp_ref=au-homepage
    Culleton and Hanson in an unattractive political separation.
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/rod-culleton-resigns-from-pauline-hansons-one-nation-party-20161218-gtdr5j.html
    Ross Fitzgerald asks if why when crime rates are falling are our prisons so overcrowded?
    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/our-overcrowded-prisons-and-recidivist-governments-20161216-gtckdz.html
    Jess Irvine writes about seven good things about our country.
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/seven-reasons-to-smile-about-australias-future-20161216-gtd23w.html

  36. Section 2 . . .

    What a horrible workplace this appears to be!
    http://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace-relations/bunnings-manager-allegedly-bullied-after-refusing-to-terminate-team-members-20161215-gtc3xz.html
    Will we be seeing more collapses in the retail industry?
    http://www.smh.com.au/business/retail/more-retail-collapses-tipped-20161216-gtcz8j.html
    Serial conman Peter Foster id still causing trouble.
    http://www.smh.com.au/business/retail/more-retail-collapses-tipped-20161216-gtcz8j.html
    Deborah Snow wonders why Turnbull bothered to speak at the Republican Movement’s birthday bash.
    http://www.smh.com.au/national/malcolm-turnbull-disappoints-crowd-at-australian-republican-movement-birthday-20161218-gtdk5f.html
    Tim Dick describes Turnbull’s passion for a republic as “peculiar”.
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/malcolm-turnbulls-peculiar-passion-for-a-republic-20161216-gtcz73.html
    And Michelle Grattan says that the reality is, all we have is two republicans as prime minister and opposition leader but no serious debate about a republic.
    https://theconversation.com/turnbull-says-republic-is-a-slow-burner-and-hes-not-turning-up-the-gas-70565
    Ross Gittins schools the pollies on the theory of supply and demand.
    http://www.smh.com.au/business/energy/mining-makes-pollies-confused-about-demand-and-supply-20161218-gtdhxe.html
    Is the age of the heathen high?
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/is-the-age-of-the-heathen-upon-us-20161216-gtd13a.html
    And for your morning purgative here’s Amanda Vanstone’s report card on Malcolm Turnbull.
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/turnbulls-end-of-year-report-card-a-final-big-tick-20161217-gtd7yw.html
    Is the government about to jettison a hundred thousand of mentally ill Australian from the NDIS? Google.
    /national-affairs/health/100000-mentally-ill-lose-ndis-cover/news-story/3f2363653fc5e86044f4ae2116395273

  37. Pauline claims that she’ll be running 39 candidates at the next Qld state election and, of course, they will all be tip-top quality … tip-top. Indeed, she reckons she’s going to meet with some of them before they get on the ticket.

  40. BK

    I heard Mandy overnight on her RN hour and no matter what her ‘conversationist’ said, she kept insisting that Turnbull had done a good job because the backpacker tax had been passed. I shall read her piece with the respect it deserves.

  42. So Malcolm Turnbull squibs it on the Republic and delivers a tepid endorsement of the concept only, with no concrete plans to make it a reality at the 25th Anniversary Dinner, and Bill Shorten cops a whack from Bill Leak!?!

    As BK said, Leak is seriously in need of help. His cartoons aren’t funny any more, just offensive.

  46. http://www.theage.com.au/world/alexander-downers-bizarre-bbc-video-urging-britain-to-get-on-with-leaving-the-eu-20161218-gtdrq7.html

    London: Australia’s High Commissioner to Britain, Alexander Downer, has appeared in a self-narrated and often wooden short documentary to urge Britain to “get on” with leaving the European Union.

    The four-minute film features Mr Downer strolling through Australia House and is set to an acoustic version of Waltzing Matilda and finishes with Mr Downer being chauffeured through central London in a Jaguar car with the numberplate “AUS.”

  47. Morning all. Thanks BK. Why does Scott Morrison urge us to “confront the air of unreality” (about his budget)? I thought confronting the reality of our debt was his job as Treasurer?

    We will see today how he went in the Mid Year Economic Failure of Oversight report (MYEFO) which will reveal Morrison is on track to fail to clear the low bar he set himself in the budget.

    When Morrison next blames us for his budget failure, remember he rejected a Labor offer of budget repair by winding back super concessions for the rich. He will soon have a new nickname “Double A” Morrison.

    Scott, the only air of unreality is you blaming somebody else for this mess.

  50. Further on our debt and economic going backwardness, remember that advice to “stick with the plan”, during the last election campaign?

    Who said this then?
    “And we will live within our means with record spending on education, health and infrastructure and at the same time bring the Budget back into balance.”
    https://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2016/06/10/stronger-new-economy-secure-our-future

    Morrison and Turnbull are damned by their own words. There was no plan.
    Have a good day all.

Comments Page 30 of 33
1 … 29 30 31 … 33

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *