‘Look up': Elon Musk responds to Aussie's foul-mouthed power rant
Travis Ricciardo, the co-host of mining podcast Money of Mine, shared footage of an Epiroc interview with Gerry Noonan, who founded engineering and constructing contracting business Geotech in 1972 and is currently technical manager at Mining Equipment Safety (ME Safety).
'What does the future look like regarding electrification and battery(-operated) electric vehicles in your mining operations?' Mr Noonan was asked.
'Well, we have coal, because we have the biggest coal deposits in the world, but we're not allowed to burn the f***ing stuff, so the world's rooted, really,' he responded – before really letting loose.
'It's alright to be idealistic, but you have to be realistic. And until the lights go out, the idiots that want to be green on everything and not do mining and not do coal, not do anything, they're going to have to go back and use candles and live in tents.'
Addressing his interviewer, Mr Noonan continued, 'You might f***ing laugh, but it's true.'
'You understand what I'm talking about – I'm not talking bullsh*t. I'm talking reality. If we don't get realistic, we're f***ed. It's as simple as that,' he said.
'We're not allowed to use uranium, we've got the biggest uranium deposits in the world in Australia and we're not allowed to mine the f***ing stuff. So, it's all f***ed. When half these c***s die, the world will be a better place, and those of us that survive will get going again.
'My next-door neighbour, I was talking to him, he's a lawyer, so he's not an idiot – well, he is a f***wit but that's, but that's another problem – he said, 'Oh that's alright, you just put (electric-vehicle charging) plugs along the highways'.
'And I said, 'But if you haven't got a f***ing source from a power station, plugs on the highways aren't going to do f***, jacksh*t', right?
'The people don't understand, they think the electricity comes out of f***ing space. But if you haven't got a charging system, which is a steam, coal-burning power station, how the f*** can you change your batteries? … A lot of the c***s don't (understand), and that's the problem with the world.'
The video was shared by lawyer and failed Liberal candidate Katherine Deves, who wrote: 'What he said. 10 f**ks. 2 c**nts. 1 f**kwit. 1 BS. 1 r00ted. 'People don't understand, they think the electricity comes from out of f**king space.''
Mr Musk – whose company Tesla is inarguably the most prolific electric vehicle manufacturer in the world, and who has long declared that solar power 'is so obviously the future for anyone can do elementary math' – then replied to Ms Deves' post.
'If he looks up, he will see something called 'The Sun',' he remarked.
To which Money of Mine's Mr Ricciardo responded: 'Coal is ancient solar power, compressed over millions of years. A natural wonder that affords reliable energy when the sun goes down.'
He then described Mr Musk as 'not an idiot, but he is a f***wit'.
Clean Energy Regulator (CER) data provided to The Guardian this week revealed there had been an 'off the charts' surge in home battery installations since the Albanese government's $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries program opened for connections on July 1.
At least 1000 batteries were being installed each day around the nation, CER said, totalling more than 11,500 in the past 24 days.
'It underlines just how hungry households are for solutions that can help them manage their energy costs,' Energy Efficiency Council chief executive Luke Menzel said.
Mr Menzel also pointed to Australia being a world leader in the adoption of rooftop solar panels (of which there is now upwards of four million installed on homes nationwide).
'The early interest in home batteries echoes the early ramp up in solar,' he said.
'This is a sign that with the right support the suburbs will step up again to invest in the efficient, electric technologies that will help them drive down their bills.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
‘Trends are worrying': Incoming US naval boss sounds AUKUS warning
Washington: The incoming chief of US Navy operations has warned the US will not be able to fulfil its AUKUS obligations without doubling its submarine-building capacity, in a fresh sign of the doubts over whether the agreement can be honoured. Meanwhile, this masthead can confirm Australia's second $800 million payment to help the US build nuclear-powered submarines was made in June, when the Australian government was already aware of the Pentagon's review of AUKUS. Admiral Daryl Caudle, President Donald Trump's nominee as chief of navy operations, told his confirmation hearing it was not yet certain the US defence industrial base was capable of producing enough Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to sell three to Australia. 'As you know, the delivery pace is not where it needs to be to make good on Pillar 1 of the AUKUS agreement, which is currently under review by our defence department,' he said last week. 'I think rightly so. We do have to understand whether the industrial base can produce the submarines required so that we can make good on the actual pact that we've made with the UK and Australia.' Across the two US shipyards that build the submarines, the current delivery rate is about 1.2 boats a year, but needs to reach 2.2 to 2.3 a year. 'That's going to require a transformational improvement. Not a 10 per cent improvement, not a 20 per cent improvement – a 100 per cent improvement,' Caudle told the hearing. 'We need a transformational improvement and the ability to deliver twice the capacity that we're currently delivering.'
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘Trends are worrying': Incoming US naval boss sounds AUKUS warning
Washington: The incoming chief of US Navy operations has warned the US will not be able to fulfil its AUKUS obligations without doubling its submarine-building capacity, in a fresh sign of the doubts over whether the agreement can be honoured. Meanwhile, this masthead can confirm Australia's second $800 million payment to help the US build nuclear-powered submarines was made in June, when the Australian government was already aware of the Pentagon's review of AUKUS. Admiral Daryl Caudle, President Donald Trump's nominee as chief of navy operations, told his confirmation hearing it was not yet certain the US defence industrial base was capable of producing enough Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to sell three to Australia. 'As you know, the delivery pace is not where it needs to be to make good on Pillar 1 of the AUKUS agreement, which is currently under review by our defence department,' he said last week. 'I think rightly so. We do have to understand whether the industrial base can produce the submarines required so that we can make good on the actual pact that we've made with the UK and Australia.' Across the two US shipyards that build the submarines, the current delivery rate is about 1.2 boats a year, but needs to reach 2.2 to 2.3 a year. 'That's going to require a transformational improvement. Not a 10 per cent improvement, not a 20 per cent improvement – a 100 per cent improvement,' Caudle told the hearing. 'We need a transformational improvement and the ability to deliver twice the capacity that we're currently delivering.'
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
'Kill switches' disguised as business: How BHP is selling out Australia's national security to a Chinese battery giant barred by the US for its alleged Beijing military ties
BHP's recent partnership should concern every Australian who cares about national security. The country's largest company has chosen to align itself with CATL, a Chinese battery giant blacklisted by the Pentagon in January. The ban targeted companies that actively support Beijing's military industry. CATL says that it has never engaged in any military-related business or activities. And yet BHP presses ahead, as if none of it matters. This isn't just another business deal. Australia's mining sector is the backbone of its economy and a pillar of national sovereignty. By allowing companies like CATL access to critical systems, Australia risks handing Beijing control over its most vital resource operations. This is about dependency. It's about surveillance. It's about forfeiting sovereignty in exchange for short-term convenience. For those rolling their eyes and brushing this off as overblown Sinophobia, take a closer look at what BHP has actually done. They've invited an alleged Chinese military-linked contractor into the heart of Australia's most strategic economic sector. CATL operates at the murky intersection of energy and surveillance. In recent years, the company has expanded into smart battery systems, units that come embedded with advanced sensors, data collection tools, GPS modules, and remote connectivity features under the banner of efficiency and monitoring. On the surface, it's marketed as innovation. However, in practice, these features enable constant data harvesting—location tracking, usage patterns, and environmental metrics—all of which can be remotely accessed or transferred, often without oversight. In other words, the technology powering your grid could also be watching it. The timing makes this betrayal all the more unforgivable. China has spent years weaponising trade against Australia, banning coal imports, slapping punitive tariffs on wine, and disrupting the barley market. These were more than policy disagreements. They were warnings. Beijing made it clear: economic ties with China come with strings attached, and when pulled, they tighten into a noose. Yet BHP has apparently learned nothing. The following statement cannot be overstated: According to the Pentagon, CATL is a company operating under a military-civil fusion doctrine, where private industry exists to serve the state. Western business models prioritise shareholders. Chinese firms, especially ones like CATL, answer to Communist Party officials. They don't see Australian resources as commodities. They see them as leverage. And that leverage is built into both software and hardware. Very soon, unless the partnership is prohibited, Beijing could have a live map of Australia's mining activities: who's producing what, where the pressure points are, and when systems can be disrupted. That type of intelligence is incredibly powerful. In a future trade war - or worse, an armed conflict - China wouldn't need to fire a shot. It could simply turn off the lights. Battery-integrated infrastructure allows for remote interference: causing breakdowns, blackouts, or 'accidental' failures with plausible deniability. BHP may be installing remote kill switches across Australia's most strategic sector, and pretending it's just business. Australia's mining sector is a geopolitical asset. It powers industries, allies and defense capabilities. Once compromised, everything downstream is at risk: agriculture, transport, telecommunications, even defense manufacturing. It won't stop with lithium. It never does. And where, I ask, is the outrage? Intelligence agencies spend billions trying to keep foreign threats out of critical infrastructure. Meanwhile, BHP is voluntarily rolling out the welcome mat for a firm flagged by the US Department of Defense as a security risk. It's like hiring a burglar as your home security consultant, except the home is the nation. The justification, as always, is economic. CATL offers cheaper technology, supposedly more efficient systems, and bulk capacity. But Australia doesn't lack domestic alternatives. The lithium exists, as does the engineering talent. What is lacking is corporate courage. BHP didn't choose CATL because it was the only option - it chose CATL because it was the cheapest. This is the price of short-term thinking: a few dollars saved today, sovereignty possibly sold tomorrow. Chinese companies don't underbid because they're efficient, they do it to drive competitors out, then control the market. Once they've embedded themselves in your infrastructure, they own you. BHP may have fallen for the oldest trick in the CCP's playbook. Parliament should be demanding answers. Who at BHP signed off on this deal? Were Chinese officials involved, either directly or through back channels? And what safeguards, if any, exist to stop data theft or cyber sabotage? If US lawmakers won't trust these companies with their supply chains, why on earth should Australians? Beijing doesn't seize control in one bold stroke. It advances slowly, through trade partnerships, infrastructure deals, and quiet influence. What begins as a battery contract ends as strategic dependence. BHP's executives seem to believe they can contain this risk, that Chinese access will stay neatly confined to technical specs and maintenance contracts. That's a fantasy. There is no such thing as a benign deal with a company that allegedly reports to a hostile state. This partnership should be terminated immediately, before a single bolt is installed. Parliament must move to outlaw future contracts with blacklisted entities. Australia is at a crossroads. BHP has chosen profit. It's up to the government to choose sovereignty - before it's too late. This is a potential national security breach, disguised as commerce, enabled by cowardice, and paid for by every Australian who thought the people in charge were looking out for them. Wake up, Australia. Your mining giant may just have invited enemy surveillance into your most critical industry. And no one in power seems willing to stop it. John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist who writes on psychology and social relations. He has a keen interest in social dysfunction and media manipulation.
