Technology

Seriously... If he's spending ~3k a year on gas and even half of that is cooking, an induction stove would pay for itself within a few years.

Same for the water heater. The fossil fuel industry didn't spend decades promoting gas because it was the most efficient option.

That still leaves the brine problem. Youve just traded one for another.

Hydrogen wouldn't cause another problem.

I couldn't care less about the 'profit' for feed in, it's just about not relying or paying energy providers. I keep getting told by Solar companies that batteries aren't cost effective yet.

Fuck bitcoin. It should be allocated to desalinisation so less water is pulled from the rivers of the driest continent on Earth. The ecology around waterways is already in the shitter, and global warming is going to 10x that clusterfuck.

Steel, aluminium and battery production can also make good use of lots of cheap renewable energy.

Austrailia is one of the best places in the world to do that, but it should be pointed out that the article you linked wants 120GWh of batteries (costing ~12 billion USD at current Li-ion prices) as well as building more than 38GW of wind power and 30GW of solar power in order to meet ~25GW of average demand and that still needs pumped hydro on top and more than 9GW of fossil fuel power to make up the gaps.

It's just about feasible in Australia with excess sun and wind, plenty of empy space, low population density and terrain amenable to hydro storage. But it isnt realy generalisable to most other places.