Carlton Supporters Club

Social Club => Blah-Blah Bar => Topic started by: PaulP on November 18, 2020, 06:18:43 pm

Title: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 18, 2020, 06:18:43 pm
It seems a rather glaring omission that the greatest crisis we have ever faced has no thread of its own. So, being the woke bleeding heart that I am, here goes :

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/18/australias-climate-record-labelled-simply-embarrassing-and-among-worst-of-g20-nations

Hopefully Scomo held on to that lump of coal rather than burning it.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 18, 2020, 07:02:29 pm
Interesting thread PaulP.

What are the low carbon options, and do they have to be renewable?

Wind
Solar PV
Solar Thermal
Solar Hydrogen
Nuclear
Tidal
Geothermal
The are significant boosters for various technologies, I'm not sure the answer is as clear as many claim.

It'll be 30 years before the 100% renewables can meet the needed demand, so it seems somewhat controversial to cut out other various low carbon options that are tagged as dirty. Accelerating the rate of renewable production makes carbon emissions worse in the short term, there is a cost to rapidly scaling up, that means reductions targets become problematic to startups.

Solar PV and WInd basically come from foreign dirty manufacturing centres, it's hypocritical to claim Solar PV is clean just because the mess that made it isn't in your own backyard. Conveniently for those industries the climate and economic accounting sits strongly locked away behind the red terror.

I'll try and find the study, I'm not well enough informed to verify it's content, but the emissions targets basically set out a group of conditions that meant growing and burning timber continuously was carbon neutral and renewable.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: Lods on November 18, 2020, 07:05:21 pm
Without turning it into a Covid thread I'd be interested to know what effect the activity during the virus has had on  emissions.
A lot less traffic on the roads.
Industry not operating at normal capacity.
Electricity in office spaces would have been a lot less.
Many reports of clearer air above normally smog bound cities.

Some of these activities may never return to normal levels and some areas of our lives and behaviour will change forever.
Combined with an American lead that seems keen to address climate issues will it be turning point.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: capcom on November 18, 2020, 07:24:24 pm
All pointless until China does something.  They never will
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 18, 2020, 07:48:54 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed-20-firms-third-carbon-emissions
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 18, 2020, 10:05:22 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed-20-firms-third-carbon-emissions
I appreciate you can't make fuel into carbon if they don't dig it up first, but you aren't forced into buying it either!

Which is perhaps the trick with China, you don't have to buy what they sell!
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 18, 2020, 10:09:30 pm
Without turning it into a Covid thread I'd be interested to know what effect the activity during the virus has had on  emissions.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0797-x#:~:text=Before%20the%20COVID-19%20pandemic,%2C4%20(see%20Methods).&text=The%20emergence%20of%20COVID-19,Organization%20on%2011%20March%202020.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: Thryleon on November 18, 2020, 11:35:34 pm
I'll believe we are serious when we start looking at nuclear.

The only issue with nuclear is if it goes Chernobyl.

They have even discovered ways to recycle the waste into batteries.

Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 19, 2020, 08:25:29 am
I'll believe we are serious when we start looking at nuclear.

The only issue with nuclear is if it goes Chernobyl.

They have even discovered ways to recycle the waste into batteries.
Yes, I realise there are issues around nuclear, but I'm fairly certain the lack of support for it is under-pinned by vested interests in other technologies. The anti-nuclear brigade always reference 50 year old technology systems. Of course some are just professionals protesting against all and any change, they aren't going to convince anyone who holds even just a modicum of knowledge on the subject.

In recent years I worked in the area of additive manufacturing, that has covered a surprisingly wide scope, everything from replacement hips to printable solar cells. The long term promise is to produce very cheap printable solar cell films, that can be laminated to surfaces like existing roofing or tiles, we are talking figures of $1 to $3 per square meter. But the scientists have done the sums, and even if this stuff had twice the efficiency of current technologies(Up from about 23% to 45%) and covered every available square meter of roof space in the country it would still fall short of demand at various times of the year.  What the solar boosters do not tell you is that they project the need will be for supplementary solar farms consuming space equivalent to the area of Tasmania, and nobody is prepared to predict what effect that will have on environment, it would certain change the planets albedo(reflectivity), and that has an impact on temperature and humidity.

Now do no take my post as an anti-solar position, I'm just postulating the stupidity of a single solution approach. Which is why I also see nuclear as a part of the solution, and many other technologies as well.

btw., Where do you put a nuclear plant?
It turns out the perfect place to put one is right next door to a desalination plant fixing two problems with one facility. It makes it very hard to believe Australia isn't a leader in this rather than an objector! Further on of the future carbon neutral technologies is clean hydrogen, produced from sea-water, where do you do that, right next door to the desalination and nuclear plant!

What are some one of the by-products of hydrogen production from sea-water?
Deuterium, Heavy Water and even Helium-3 in small quantities. Materials needed for use in the operation of the ultimate clean energy source, fusion reactors which the EU and UN is pouring trillions of dollars into developing, several new fusion pilot sites will be running before the end of this decade, none of them in Australia, despite Australia providing some of the leader researchers!

Yet we pour billions into buying very dirtily produced (well not in my backyard) cheap as crap solar PV cells, made using bucket chemistry in the virtual slave labour conditions of China, like the fumes and by-products never cross the border! An industry that in the 2000s is the equivalent of a 1970s asbestos sheet production facility! If produced in the correct clean safe and controlled environment they'd be costing us 5x the price to install and would need to last 50 years to get a payback, they barely last 15 years now, in fact the company that installed them will be long gone before you get to exercise your 20 year warranty! The real solar PV panel cost, not the buy price but the cost, should roughly be the equivalent of a similarly sized TV per panel.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: rocky on November 19, 2020, 02:22:01 pm
All pointless until China does something.  They never will
I'll see that and raise that with a "All pointless until Brazil stops burning up the Amazon. They never will"

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon rainforest rose more than 88% in June 2019 compared with the same month in 2018, and more than doubled in January 2020 compared with the same month in 2019. In August 2019, 30,901 individual forest fires were reported, three times the number a year earlier.
Once they Amazon goes we're all cactus. Thankfully, I'll be long gone by the time that happens.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 19, 2020, 02:57:50 pm
I think all of us need to address this issue in the deepest, most profound way possible. Individuals, governments, corporations. There's a circularity in the use and abuse of resources on the planet that implicates all of us. The Chinese don't spew out crap from their factories and the South Americans don't burn the forest just because they're bored. Until they and us stop chasing endless consumerism, cheapest prices, highest profits, unsustainable agricultural practices etc. we will go nowhere.

On an individual scale, places like China will continue to produce junk we don't need because there is a demand for it. Despite being difficult to deal with, companies will continue to invest in China mainly because labor is cheap and well educated, and unions, environmental controls etc. are minimal or non existent. Profits first, then daylight, then everything else.

On a corporate scale, Steven Donziger says hi.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 19, 2020, 03:20:10 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpNcJcVqxA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpNcJcVqxA)
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 19, 2020, 03:29:18 pm
As an aside to the wider climate issues, I've been to Sidoarjo and witnessed the the effects of the Gempol disaster first hand, I was one of the few times in my life I was left speechless!
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: Baggers on November 19, 2020, 05:27:57 pm
I think all of us need to address this issue in the deepest, most profound way possible. Individuals, governments, corporations. There's a circularity in the use and abuse of resources on the planet that implicates all of us. The Chinese don't spew out crap from their factories and the South Americans don't burn the forest just because they're bored. Until they and us stop chasing endless consumerism, cheapest prices, highest profits, unsustainable agricultural practices etc. we will go nowhere.  Correction, Pauly, without meaningful change we will be going somewhere... it's called, oblivion.

On an individual scale, places like China will continue to produce junk we don't need because there is a demand for it. Despite being difficult to deal with, companies will continue to invest in China mainly because labor is cheap and well educated, and unions, environmental controls etc. are minimal or non existent. Profits first, then daylight, then everything else.

On a corporate scale, Steven Donziger says hi.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 19, 2020, 06:19:27 pm
I'll believe we are serious when we start looking at nuclear.

The only issue with nuclear is if it goes Chernobyl.

They have even discovered ways to recycle the waste into batteries.


Nuclear is the elephant in the room....Solar generated power fed back into the grid causes regulation problems for power distributors and often leads to power distributors switching off feeds. Its not reliable and wind turbines are not really clean or green either and their output is trivial. You take a lot of land , kill a lot of animals, sink concrete into the ground for foundations and mine land looking for rare earth magnets for the turbines. The housings are steel with fibreglass blades in the main, its as about as green as the exhaust from my old HG Holden. You need way more material to make a wind turbine than a gas turbine.....
The way forward is Gas and Nuclear and thats where the money needs to be put to work.....
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: cookie2 on November 19, 2020, 06:27:41 pm
Was reading recently that rooftop solar feeding into the grid can now cause instability problems because of the sheer volume of it. Apparently the generation companies often have to just turn it off.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: Baggers on November 19, 2020, 06:31:45 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpNcJcVqxA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpNcJcVqxA)

What a horror story. The conduct of Exon/Chevron is beyond reprehensible... then enter the satanic figure of Judge Kaplan. If there isn't a screenplay being written right now about this entire vulgar farce I'll chew off my own legs. The legal groundswell against Kaplan is huge and growing, he'll die disgraced and an example of bench corruption to the max.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 19, 2020, 06:53:01 pm
What a horror story. The conduct of Exon/Chevron is beyond reprehensible... then enter the satanic figure of Judge Kaplan. If there isn't a screenplay being written right now about this entire vulgar farce I'll chew off my own legs. The legal groundswell against Kaplan is huge and growing, he'll die disgraced and an example of bench corruption to the max.

It would be bad enough even as a one off. But I imagine there's several of those types of catastrophes we don't know about.  And Steven Donziger ? I don't really know what to say about his courage and bravery.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 19, 2020, 06:56:30 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/11/16/arctic-refuge-drilling-trump/
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: PaulP on November 19, 2020, 06:56:58 pm
This thread should really be called "The Climate / Environment Thread". If someone at HQ could please change it, that would be great.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: kruddler on November 19, 2020, 08:23:37 pm
Nuclear is the elephant in the room....
20 years ago when i was studying engineering, the lecturer was raving about how good Nuclear is and despite best intentions solar, wind etc they were nowhere near it. The major problem with it is public perception.

20 years on, nothing is changed.

We need to change the publics view on nuclear power and we can get rid of coal forever.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: capcom on November 19, 2020, 08:25:37 pm
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54963157

Here's half your problem
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on November 19, 2020, 08:46:02 pm
Nuclear is the elephant in the room....Solar generated power fed back into the grid causes regulation problems for power distributors and often leads to power distributors switching off feeds. Its not reliable and wind turbines are not really clean or green either and their output is trivial. You take a lot of land , kill a lot of animals, sink concrete into the ground for foundations and mine land looking for rare earth magnets for the turbines. The housings are steel with fibreglass blades in the main, its as about as green as the exhaust from my old HG Holden. You need way more material to make a wind turbine than a gas turbine.....
The way forward is Gas and Nuclear and thats where the money needs to be put to work.....
Perfect summation EB. Drive around France, Nukes everywhere, time to think smart.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 19, 2020, 08:58:44 pm
20 years ago when i was studying engineering, the lecturer was raving about how good Nuclear is and despite best intentions solar, wind etc they were nowhere near it. The major problem with it is public perception.


20 years on, nothing is changed.

We need to change the publics view on nuclear power and we can get rid of coal forever.
Agree..35 years ago I was studying Elec Engineering out at Swinburne and they said the same things.....Chernobyl created a lot of negatives for Nuclear though and its the go to argument for anti nukers.
Needless to say the plants that have been operating successfully and safely around the world are never mentioned...440 Reactors that produce about 10% of the worlds energy, France have really embraced the technology and generate 70% of their power this way or close to it.
Some Stats on all the different countries embracing the technology....
https://www.statista.com/statistics/267158/number-of-nuclear-reactors-in-operation-by-country/
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: kruddler on November 19, 2020, 09:22:14 pm
Agree..35 years ago I was studying Elec Engineering out at Swinburne and they said the same things.....Chernobyl created a lot of negatives for Nuclear though and its the go to argument for anti nukers.
Needless to say the plants that have been operating successfully and safely around the world are never mentioned...440 Reactors that produce about 10% of the worlds energy, France have really embraced the technology and generate 70% of their power this way or close to it.
Some Stats on all the different countries embracing the technology....
https://www.statista.com/statistics/267158/number-of-nuclear-reactors-in-operation-by-country/


Coal generates about 40% of the worlds power.....and there are about 2500 plants.
10% from nuclear power and only 440 plants.

Ditch the coal plants, have nuclear plants and overall you'll have less plants as nuclear is far more efficient....and better for the environment despite the potential issues.

With Nuclear there is the potential for something to go wrong.....so many safe guards in place nowadays makes it unlikely. But reality is they are super safe. Chenobyl occured because they were actually forcing a meltdown and shut off some failsafes as an exercise. Oops. That was human error.....which has been fixed nowadays.

With Coal, there is not the potential for something to go wrong.....just its everyday operation is wrong. Its death by a thousand cuts. its constantly hurting the environment and its just a matter of when we go beyond breaking point (if we haven't already).


Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 20, 2020, 08:19:02 am
When the lights start going out, the air-conditioners turn off, and you can't cook on your induction stove because gas was banned, then the public will be asking where is the nuclear!

Monocultures are death, no matter whether it's a plant or a power scheme!
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 20, 2020, 08:21:52 am
With Coal, there is not the potential for something to go wrong.....just its everyday operation is wrong. Its death by a thousand cuts. its constantly hurting the environment and its just a matter of when we go beyond breaking point (if we haven't already).
Interestingly, more radiation is emitted as particulates from the ordinary daily operation of brown coal fired power plants than any ordinary daily operation of a nuclear plant. It's also a problem for clean coal, because whatever particulate solids you collect is basically concentrating the radioactive particulates.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 20, 2020, 08:26:21 am
Was reading recently that rooftop solar feeding into the grid can now cause instability problems because of the sheer volume of it. Apparently the generation companies often have to just turn it off.
Technically they don't turn it off but they cut it off from feeding back into the grid, and the owner/user then losses feedback credit$. This is the reason why most areas limit feedback to 5kW, because the problems caused by sun and clouds means a completely unstable power grid.

It takes many minutes for the large centralised power stations to ramp up or wind down when demand for power changes, Solar PV changes performance as fast as the shadow of a cloud or plane passes over the cells.

This isn't a cartel issue, it's a technical issue, that prevents the infrastructure failing or catching fire even! I read an article by an Electrical Engineer that Solar PV can produce a pulse equivalent to a solar flare, if unregulated that is potentially enough to melt the big HV overhead distribution lines!
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 20, 2020, 10:39:36 am
Technically they don't turn it off but they cut it off from feeding back into the grid, and the owner/user then losses feedback credit$. This is the reason why most areas limit feedback to 5kW, because the problems caused by sun and clouds means a completely unstable power grid.

It takes many minutes for the large centralised power stations to ramp up or wind down when demand for power changes, Solar PV changes performance as fast as the shadow of a cloud or plane passes over the cells.

This isn't a cartel issue, it's a technical issue, that prevents the infrastructure failing or catching fire even! I read an article by an Elelctrical Engineer that Solar PV can produce a pulse equivalent to a solar flare, if unregulated that is potentially enough to melt the big HV overhead distribution lines!
The bolded text is very true and this is exactly what happens, you have the added complication of a hybrid carrier system where a lot of old transmission gear joins with new equipment causing failure when these spikes occur. Ausnet in particular have this as a major issue for their engineering staff.
Title: Re: The Climate Thread
Post by: LP on November 24, 2020, 10:18:32 am
I was interested to read about the Chairperson of a major Superannuation Fund calling for our government to end to carryover credits.

Primarily they have been used/gamed by some governments and large multinationals as a stalling tactic, a way to carry on regardless while others make up for them ignoring climate action. For example, the concept that a large car company that has reduced the fuel consumption of it's vehicles in previous years gets a credit.

A good example of gaming, I believe one SE Asian nation / organisation obtained credits for planting oil palm as a form of greenhouse offset/reduction despite that planting occurring as a replacement of previously destroyed old growth forest.

btw., I've read reports that rebut the claim carryover credits benefit multinationals as they are only applied to nation states, but the problem is governments own some of the biggest offenders!

But I concede, while it will force more to become genuinely involved in the process it may also have a negative impact on certain sectors. Those credits, when not being gamed, are often what fund some of the most aggressive and progressive forward action. This is perhaps where a big superannuation fund can flex it's muscle.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 05, 2020, 05:17:28 pm
https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-resulting-in-profound-immediate-and-worsening-health-impacts-over-120-researchers-say-151027
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 07, 2020, 08:14:57 pm
https://theconversation.com/it-might-be-the-worlds-biggest-ocean-but-the-mighty-pacific-is-in-peril-150745
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 07, 2020, 10:11:31 pm
I can't save the world, but I can save myself from too much rubbish.

I have two compost bins.

I recycle everything possible.

I red cycle my plastics.

I make sure we use the e waste cages at work for electrical waste.

If everyone does the same, we'll all go a long way to helping. 

Our rubbish bin usually has no more than two bags of rubbish every fortnight and its mainly stuff that can't be recycled.  We even buy bin liners that are made from either recycled plastic, or are biodegradable.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on December 07, 2020, 10:25:18 pm
I certainly back the second link Paul posted .... but you can't patrol the Pacific.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 08, 2020, 09:26:12 am
Thinking about things, laterally I can probably/possibly do more by buying less products wrapped in plastic.  We do this as much as possible, but our number one culprit at the minute would likely be a leafy green mix when we can just buy the greens seperately.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 08, 2020, 10:17:21 am
Thinking about things, laterally I can probably/possibly do more by buying less products wrapped in plastic.  We do this as much as possible, but our number one culprit at the minute would likely be a leafy green mix when we can just buy the greens seperately.
Firstly, in the world of many there is no such device as a single use bag!

It's going to get harder, the plastic bag ban is counterproductive in this regard.

The problem is that producers want you to get their goods home and in use in the best possible condition, free of cross contamination and spoilage. So the general trend after the check-out bag ban is more and more items coming pre-packaged. This functionally eliminates cross contamination coming from re-used fabric bags, which is seen as a huge liability by producers. It is also viewed as improving the transport condition of the goods. Ireland was the first country to ban bags, and the total plastic consumption increased after the supermarket bag ban and grown steadily.

A new threat are those re-used bags at the COVID/Checkout counter, you can expect that it won't be long before re-useable bags are banned if the policy markers are consistent, if not then why not share a mask, are those re-used bags looped over many COVID Cough Elbows? But they are probably hypocrites that will tell you your hands are dirty but that 3 year old nylon supermarket bag is fine as it is unwashed and used for everything from a lettuce to nuts and bolts from the hardware store!

The irony for me is that it seems the primary offenders of abusing single use plastic bags are wealthy leftist socialites who see a previously used bag as contaminated and trash it, it ranks marginally above a used snot rag in their life rating system. It's a bit like clothes and handbags, can't be seen wearing them twice unless your driving to the tip recycle store to donate last weeks clothes and fashions to the poor! They then paint the general public with their own shallow perspective and accuse everybody of doing the same.

Yes you guessed it, the rest of us "we to us, them to them" are all horrible horrible environmental vandals, and they'll tweet it out on the new spang-dangled rare earth repository of an 2020 iPhone because that ridiculously old 2019 model one was well, old! Put last weeks clothes on and off to the tip with that phone!

The vast bulk of the population was already re-using those "Single use bags" for secondary purposes as bin liners or some such purpose. Yes, in the world of many there is no such device as a single use bag!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 10, 2020, 07:11:46 pm
https://theconversation.com/3-reasons-meeting-climate-targets-and-dumping-kyoto-credits-wont-salvage-australias-international-reputation-151836
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 10, 2020, 07:24:09 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/record-spring-heat-a-one-in-500-000-chance-without-climate-change-20201210-p56mfw.html
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 11, 2020, 08:02:55 am
This statistical aspect of climate change, much like the statistical aspect of virology, are the hardest things to communicate.

I like to use gambling or lottery analogies, they seem to resonate with most people because most of us aren't that lucky and we get how rare a big lottery / punting win is!

These climates events as we are experiencing them, if they are just random events, are statistically like backing three winning straight up Quadrellas in a row! It's not impossible, but out of the billions and billions of bets made each day, trillions each month and year globally, it's happened maybe once or twice! I believe just once here in Australia, in the whole history of punting a single gambler backed in three winning consecutive Quadies just once, but he did it by boxing the field in some legs, so he doesn't even qualify because it wasn't a straight up bet!

Boxing the field on some legs is like Pumping carbon into the atmosphere, increasing the chance of it happening!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 11, 2020, 02:35:26 pm
My issue with the whole climate change debate is that it disregards the following:

At least five major ice ages have occurred throughout Earth's history: the earliest was over 2 billion years ago, and the most recent one began approximately 3 million years ago and continues today (yes, we live in an ice age!). Currently, we are in a warm interglacial that began about 11,000 years ago.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles

I have no issues with us attempting to be greener as we have caused more damage to the overall environment than any other species (I doubt you will find any other species that logs, or pollutes to the same levels as humanity) but the answer to these problems is quite simple.

Humanity is a parasite on the earth, and appears hell bent on consuming it, and until we work out that exponential growth of humanity correlates with the exponential growth of pollutants which means that the only real way forward is to live simpler and consume less, and perhaps grow slower and maybe revert back to dying younger.  Remember when living past 70 was the exception not the norm?  Now the exception is the opposite, and 70 year olds run countries.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 11, 2020, 03:44:12 pm
My issue with the whole climate change debate is that it disregards the following:

At least five major ice ages have occurred throughout Earth's history: the earliest was over 2 billion years ago, and the most recent one began approximately 3 million years ago and continues today (yes, we live in an ice age!). Currently, we are in a warm interglacial that began about 11,000 years ago.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles

I have no issues with us attempting to be greener as we have caused more damage to the overall environment than any other species (I doubt you will find any other species that logs, or pollutes to the same levels as humanity) but the answer to these problems is quite simple.

Humanity is a parasite on the earth, and appears hell bent on consuming it, and until we work out that exponential growth of humanity correlates with the exponential growth of pollutants which means that the only real way forward is to live simpler and consume less, and perhaps grow slower and maybe revert back to dying younger.  Remember when living past 70 was the exception not the norm?  Now the exception is the opposite, and 70 year olds run countries.

The science of climate change is enmeshed within the study past climatic fluctuations Thry.  What that tells us is that the climate is changing faster now than at any time in the past. 

And we’re not in an ice age now: Glacial = ice age, Interglacial = no ice age.

The geological time scale used Holocene to denote the current geological age.  It’s now called the Anthropocene to reflect the period during which human activity has been the dominant influence on climate and the environment.  The Holocene commenced at the end of the last ice age (or glacial period) about 10,000 years ago.  The Anthropocene’s commencement is being pushed back to around 15,000 years as it is argued that human impact on the environment and climate commenced during the last ice age.

Palynological studies suggest that Aboriginal burning practices changed the Australian environment and biodiversity tens of thousands of years before that.

The elephant in the room is the exponential growth of the human population as well as the mantra that economies must continue to grow.  We can reduce consumption and waste and minimise environmental impacts but we’ll continue on a path to oblivion as long as humanity continues to breed like rabbits.



Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 11, 2020, 04:09:30 pm
Interestingly, the population growth is now expected to plateau between 2050 to 2100, so in this regard it won't be growing exponentially like it has in the past. I think Attenborough covered this in his recent A Life on Our planet documentary.

Apparently this is now validated across several disciplines including epidemiology, macro-economics, ecology and sociology. The influences are complex, related to changes in society, female empowerment, education, wealth and health. It seems the longer we are likely to live, the greater the chances of survival in a healthy state, the less children we have on average.

When I first heard this a few years back I thought it might be a bit of propaganda, designed to diminish the need for urgent change, but it isn't it and it doesn't diminish the need to act at all.  Change is still required, because despite population growth slowing, resources continue to diminish and energy consumption per-capita rises. This is where the scope of the climate change issue broadens to become much much more than just greenhouse gas, and is the is the spawn of continuous economic growth which is different to population growth.

The ultimate climate change buster is fusion energy, it makes all other sources of energy redundant and filthy by comparison, but there is no guarantee it is either possible or cheap. Pretty much every other source of energy, is dirty by comparison, even solar, wind and tidal. But even if fusion became globally available tomorrow, resources would still diminish.

Humans are not a good judge of these things, for example almost every person you ask will tell you hydroelectric is clean. When in fact it's one of the most environmentally damaging forms of energy production you can have. They think nuclear fission is dirty and dangerous, when it's one of the safest and environmentally clean sources of energy currently available. Humans judge these things on emotion, to a human a nuclear power plant is a giant atomic bomb while a hydroelectric dam is a beautiful eco friendly lake, nothing is further from the truth. We see the very rare instantaneous effects of a major event, and ignore numerous occurences of the creeping death!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 11, 2020, 04:43:36 pm
The science of climate change is enmeshed within the study past climatic fluctuations Thry.  What that tells us is that the climate is changing faster now than at any time in the past. 

And we’re not in an ice age now: Glacial = ice age, Interglacial = no ice age.

The geological time scale used Holocene to denote the current geological age.  It’s now called the Anthropocene to reflect the period during which human activity has been the dominant influence on climate and the environment.  The Holocene commenced at the end of the last ice age (or glacial period) about 10,000 years ago.  The Anthropocene’s commencement is being pushed back to around 15,000 years as it is argued that human impact on the environment and climate commenced during the last ice age.

Palynological studies suggest that Aboriginal burning practices changed the Australian environment and biodiversity tens of thousands of years before that.

The elephant in the room is the exponential growth of the human population as well as the mantra that economies must continue to grow.  We can reduce consumption and waste and minimise environmental impacts but we’ll continue on a path to oblivion as long as humanity continues to breed like rabbits.





I only disagree with one part of your post DJC, and that is that the evidence points to us still being in an Ice Age even though you might have stated we arent because even at a recent trivia night I attended the correct answer was that we are technically still in one, (my gut said that its true was a better trivia answer so we got the points on that one).


https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/earth/ask-a-scientist-about-our-environment/how-did-the-ice-age-end

Ive read this up a few times, because I used to have a theory that we were on track with respect to natural cycles and the earth warming because I was sick of the climate debate, and the answers I found were to debunk that theory and keep reading and understand that we are actually having a bigger impact, and that has been thus far to stave off the next glacial period thanks to 100 years of warming which will either result in an over correction and flip to a massive ice age to fix it, or cause a lot of damage.  Thing is, it seems to point to the earth wobble, and bulge causing more change here than not.


Quote
Scientists are still working to understand what causes ice ages. One important factor is the amount of light Earth receives from the Sun. The amount of sunlight that reaches Earth can vary quite a lot, mainly due to three factors:

    how much Earth is tilted relative to the Sun
    whether Earth wobbles a lot or a little as it spins on its axis (kind of like how a toy top can wobble a lot or a little as it spins)
    the shape of Earth's orbit as it goes around the Sun (whether it is shaped more like a circle or more like an ellipse or oval)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
Quote
Glacials and interglacials
See also: Glacial period and Interglacial
Shows the pattern of temperature and ice volume changes associated with recent glacials and interglacials
Minimum and maximum glaciation
Minimum (interglacial, black) and maximum (glacial, grey) glaciation of the northern hemisphere
Minimum (interglacial, black) and maximum (glacial, grey) glaciation of the southern hemisphere

Within the current glaciation, more temperate and more severe periods have occurred. The colder periods are called glacial periods, the warmer periods interglacials, such as the Eemian Stage.[1] There is evidence that similar glacial cycles occurred in previous glaciations, including the Andean-Saharan[41] and the late Paleozoic ice house. The glacial cycles of the late Paleozoic ice house are likely responsible for the deposition of cyclothems.[42]

Glacials are characterized by cooler and drier climates over most of the earth and large land and sea ice masses extending outward from the poles. Mountain glaciers in otherwise unglaciated areas extend to lower elevations due to a lower snow line. Sea levels drop due to the removal of large volumes of water above sea level in the icecaps. There is evidence that ocean circulation patterns are disrupted by glaciations. The glacials and interglacials coincide with changes in orbital forcing of climate due to Milankovitch cycles, which are periodic changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of the Earth's rotational axis.

The earth has been in an interglacial period known as the Holocene for around 11,700 years,[43] and an article in Nature in 2004 argues that it might be most analogous to a previous interglacial that lasted 28,000 years.[44] Predicted changes in orbital forcing suggest that the next glacial period would begin at least 50,000 years from now. Moreover, anthropogenic forcing from increased greenhouse gases is estimated to potentially outweigh the orbital forcing of the Milankovitch cycles for hundreds of thousand of years.[45][5][4]

The variation of sunlight reaching Earth is one cause of ice ages.

Over thousands of years, the amount of sunshine reaching Earth changes by quite a lot, particularly in the northern latitudes, the area near and around the North Pole. When less sunlight reaches the northern latitudes, temperatures drop and more water freezes into ice, starting an ice age. When more sunlight reaches the northern latitudes, temperatures rise, ice sheets melt, and the ice age ends. But there are many other factors. So if you became a climate scientist one day, you could make your own discoveries!


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on December 11, 2020, 04:53:52 pm
We're condemned to live on this planet, we will never survive on another, be it this solar system, or anywhere else.  It's an impossible.

The worst threat to humanity is ourselves and listening to any green alternatives hardly helps.

We MUST go nuclear.  The rest are just distractions

 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 11, 2020, 05:04:43 pm
    how much Earth is tilted relative to the Sun
    whether Earth wobbles a lot or a little as it spins on its axis (kind of like how a toy top can wobble a lot or a little as it spins)
    the shape of Earth's orbit as it goes around the Sun (whether it is shaped more like a circle or more like an ellipse or oval)
@Thryleon  This bit is a horribly simplistic hash up between what causes the seasons and what influences long term climate change.

The shape of the earths orbit effectively doesn't vary at all on times scales measured in billions of years, it's almost perfectly round less than 3% elliptical. The Sun's changing flux over that time has far more influence than any small orbital variations but even that solar flux variation is trivial on human time scales.

The earth wobbles (Precession) but this has no long term effect as it is cyclic, and the same applies in regards to the tilt. Small timing variations causing correlations between precession and Earth's position in it's elliptical orbit can cause some slight longer term seasonal variations. This is because a conjunctions between the perihelion, aphelion and precession.

The seasons are cyclic because they are caused by the tilt, the Earth is effectively a big spinning gyroscope pointing mostly in the same direction with a slight precession. But Earth's precession takes 26000 years to complete. Interestingly, the main climate effect of precession is modelled to be an evening out of the seasons mid-cycle, not a change in the averages, at some stage in the 26000 cycle summer and winter would be barely distinguishable around the equator. There is no history of glacial or inter-glacial periods tide to precession, even the Maunder Minimum has been ruled out as a precession effect.

A nice debunking argument for the climate change sceptics who try to claim orbital dynamics is the cause, is that the Earth is closest to the sun(About 5,000,000 km closer) when the Northern Hemisphere is in the middle of it's winter.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 13, 2020, 12:17:29 pm
I only disagree with one part of your post DJC, and that is that the evidence points to us still being in an Ice Age even though you might have stated we arent because even at a recent trivia night I attended the correct answer was that we are technically still in one, (my gut said that its true was a better trivia answer so we got the points on that one).

Your trivia master was wrong Thry  :)

This is my bread and butter; you can’t understand Australian archaeology without understanding the climatic context.  For example, the sundering of Bass and Torres Straits and the inundation of what is now the continental shelf had profound effects on the first Australians.

Stone artefacts have been found on Mud Islands in Port Phillip Bay.  While it is possible that Aboriginal people could have navigated there, it would have been an extremely risky voyage in the watercraft they had.  However, recent studies have revealed that Port Phillip Bay was dry land between 1,000 and 2,800 years ago and it would have been possible to walk to what would have been prominent dunes on Port Phillip Plain.  The major causes of the drying up of Port Phillip Bay was sand deposits blocking the Heads combined with higher than normal evaporation rates, reflecting a drier climate at that time.  Port Phillip Bay as dry land features in the oral histories of the Kulin people of central Victoria.

Technically, there are no “ice ages”, it is a lay term.  Climate scientists, geologists, archaeologists, palynologists, etc refer to glacial and inter-glacial periods.  As I said previously, glacial equates to ice age and inter-glacial is not an ice age in lay terms.

Looking at it from the perspective of the geological time scale:

The Pleistocene is the most recent period of repeated glaciations. Until recently, glaciations were a feature of the end of the Pliocene Period (the “ice age” was the Plio-Pleistocene) but the beginning of the Pleistocene has been pushed back to 2.58 Ma so that all recent repeated glaciations are within the Pleistocene era.  In other words, the Pleistocene is the “ice age”.

The Holocene refers to the last 11,700 years, that is, the time since the end of the last major glacial epoch, the Pleistocene or "ice age." There have been the small scale climate shifts since the commencement of the Holocene, including the "Little Ice Age" between about 1,200 and 1,700 CE, but that was restricted to the northern hemisphere. The defining feature of the Holocene is the relatively stable climate, as opposed to the widely fluctuation climate swings of the Pleistocene.  Note that the “Little Ice Age” almost overlaps with the period that Port Phillip Bay was dry land so while it was colder in the northern hemisphere, southern Australia was experiencing higher evaporation rates.  That does suggest warmer temperatures but a much larger part of Australia was arid during the Pleistocene as more of the water budget was locked up in ice caps and glaciers.

Where confusion can arise is the grouping together of the Pleistocene and Holocene as the Quaternary Period.  Most of the 2.59Ma of the Quaternary Period has been glacial so you could say that we are still in a period of repeated glaciation.  Of course, that ignores the fact that Holocene is defined as the period following the repeated glaciation of the Pleistocene.

On top of that is the use of Anthropocene as the most recent geological period.  I don’t think that there is agreement on when human activity became the driver of climate and environmental change but it doesn’t necessarily coincide with the Holocene period.  Many researchers push the commencement of the Anthropocene back beyond 11,700 years BP that is accepted as the end of the Pleistocene.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 13, 2020, 12:59:25 pm
Note that the “Little Ice Age” almost overlaps with the period that Port Phillip Bay was dry land so while it was colder in the northern hemisphere, southern Australia was experiencing higher evaporation rates.  That does suggest warmer temperatures but a much larger part of Australia was arid during the Pleistocene as more of the water budget was locked up in ice caps and glaciers.
Yes, this correlation between ice caps and dry hot periods over low latitudes is frequently overlooked in climate sceptic debates. The general public's assumption is that hot means dry, when history indicates you need more ice at the caps to be dry at low latitudes in the absence of some other effect.

Just An FYI for some readers;
Low Lattiudes are near the equator, +/- 0° north or south, High Latitudes are near the poles, +/- 90° North or South. Be careful when reading about High and Low latitudes, because a term like "Down South" doesn't mean at a Low Latitiude!

(https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/images/help/lowmidhigh/EN_World.jpg)

Sometimes I think modern scientists should throw out the historical deference to old terminology, some of the terms used in this case were originally phrased when the debates over the earth being round, flat or hollow were still underway!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 13, 2020, 06:34:37 pm
I don't know about what LP posted, but i listened to a podcast on iceages and they agreed with Thry and his trivia master. We are still in the latter stages of an ice age.

I cannot recall the exact definition and where it came from, but if i had an educated guess at it, it would be the fact we still have ice on our caps.

From memory there was 3 stages. ice age, middle bit aka lesser ice age which we are in now and non-ice age. Obviously the technical jargon is not there, but the point remains.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 13, 2020, 08:49:12 pm
I don't know about what LP posted, but i listened to a podcast on iceages and they agreed with Thry and his trivia master. We are still in the latter stages of an ice age.

I cannot recall the exact definition and where it came from, but if i had an educated guess at it, it would be the fact we still have ice on our caps.

From memory there was 3 stages. ice age, middle bit aka lesser ice age which we are in now and non-ice age. Obviously the technical jargon is not there, but the point remains.

That was the rationale too in his explanations.

The technicality was that we have periods where the ice levels increase.



Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 13, 2020, 09:20:10 pm
https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-we-wont-be-heading-into-an-ice-age-any-time-soon-123675

This aside though, the timing is right for the next ice age to come around soon. For the past two and a half million years, the Earth has experienced regular ice ages, related to slow changes to earth’s orbit around the sun and changes in the earth’s axis of rotation (Milankovitch cycles). We are currently in one of the warm periods (interglacials) between ice ages and the present interglacial should be ending about now. The catch is carbon dioxide.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 13, 2020, 10:40:33 pm
https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-we-wont-be-heading-into-an-ice-age-any-time-soon-123675

This aside though, the timing is right for the next ice age to come around soon. For the past two and a half million years, the Earth has experienced regular ice ages, related to slow changes to earth’s orbit around the sun and changes in the earth’s axis of rotation (Milankovitch cycles). We are currently in one of the warm periods (interglacials) between ice ages and the present interglacial should be ending about now. The catch is carbon dioxide.

About 100 years according to my research.  What that means for humanity if we solve it and it happens i find most interesting.

After all, I think a proper ice age might be worse for humanity in general.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 13, 2020, 11:29:03 pm
I suppose the first thing you have to define when discussing the idea of glacial or inter-glacial periods is defining what either period is, some will refer to the Maunder Minimum as an Ice Age but others suggest hardly! For example what is the "period" interval, 11kyr, 19, 23, 40, 100kyr?

If it's 11kyr, and the Maunder Minimum was perhaps a sign of solar dynamics that triggered the Little Ice Age, the next seems overdue.

Fwiw, a lot of commentary denies the Maunder Minimum was an effect because it only lasted a short time in relation to the claimed period of the Little Ice Age, but of course that ignores that the possibility that the solar dynamic effect causing the Maunder Minimum were only present when low solar sunspot activity was actually being observed and detectable by the best people of the time. If the solar dynamics had no effect was it orbital dynamics, if so what changed in this regard on such a short cycle, certainly not orbital dynamics?

The problem is the best data available only goes back about 450kyr, from ice cores, and that the evidence for influences from orbital dynamics in those cores is only weak if not merely just a correlation. The Earth has precessed many times over that period, like a clock that ticks out 26kyr cycles. So much so that some even question the validity of Milankovitch cycles, if they are real, there are climate effects but it seems they are not explained by orbital dynamics. Further if they are real they most likely don't happen(that is the polite don't) in 11kyr cycles, or 23kyr, or 40kyr but closer to 500kyr cycles. Actually, a huge flaw is that if followed explicitly a modelling of the Milankovich cycle predicts asymmetric freezing and thawing of Earth's opposing poles, and that is not what happened as the record shows the whole Earth cooling or warming. I won't get into the arbitrary choices made when analysing or modelling data, it's a rabbit warren.

The take home is that orbital effects have an influence, but they are not likely to be the explanation of climate dynamics, think of them as a small contributing factor not a outright cause. It's the largess of humans to explain these things, and claim to have the answer, it's much smarter to admit there is no answer and talk about only what we know.

Humans are pattern matching machines, and we are powerless in taming this evolved ability.

Opinion.
Many will post commentaries declaring what the weather will do next century like it's a certainty!

Reality.
We have magnetic field records in rocks 4Gyr old, we have thousands of years of detailed human records about Earth's magnetic fields and fluctuations, we can measure these things with instruments more sensitive and accurate than any thermometer. Yet we can't predict where the magnetic north pole will be next year beyond a general trend in direction and speed, it's behaviour tomorrow is a mystery! It's finely detailed movement is chaotic!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 14, 2020, 10:33:56 am
https://theconversation.com/up-to-90-of-electricity-from-solar-and-wind-the-cheapest-option-by-2030-csiro-analysis-151831
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 14, 2020, 01:32:23 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/economy-and-ecology-cormann-s-top-oecd-rival-pledges-climate-reform-20201210-p56m75.html
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 14, 2020, 02:03:42 pm
https://theconversation.com/up-to-90-of-electricity-from-solar-and-wind-the-cheapest-option-by-2030-csiro-analysis-151831
I'm on the fringe of this stuff having been involved with some of the R&D for quite a few years, it is based on some rather grandiose assumptions relating to storage and efficiency, for example it still requires Hydroelectric as a large scale storage medium which from a perspective of the environment is pretty damaging if not the very worst option, note hydro emits both CO2 and methane as well as destroying beyond repair many many square kilometres of high country type environments.

Each participant has to talk up their technology as it's a war to get funding to keep on developing the systems.

Base load demand will never go away, hospitals, entertainment and big industry need 24x7. There isn't a hope in hell Joe Average will turn off his TV when the footy is on just to keep a hospital from being blacked out, unless of course he has to go to hospital at which time he'll demand everybody to switch off, sorry for the cynicism!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 17, 2020, 07:36:26 pm
The value of Australia’s newest coal-fired power station, Bluewaters in WA, has been written down to zero, wiping out a $1.2B investment after just ten years.

Simon Nicholas, an energy finance analyst at IEEFA, says;
"In Australia, the cost of utility-scale renewables is often lower than the cost of fuel for coal-fired power plants.
So, the long-term future for coal-fired power plants is looking fairly grim and banks are responding to that — they don't want to finance coal anymore."

And the self-proclaimed champions of the free market are clamouring for more coal-fired power stations  ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 17, 2020, 07:48:12 pm
Opinion.
Many will post commentaries declaring what the weather will do next century like it's a certainty!

Reality.
We have magnetic field records in rocks 4Gyr old, we have thousands of years of detailed human records about Earth's magnetic fields and fluctuations, we can measure these things with instruments more sensitive and accurate than any thermometer. Yet we can't predict where the magnetic north pole will be next year beyond a general trend in direction and speed, it's behaviour tomorrow is a mystery! It's finely detailed movement is chaotic!

It’s relatively easy to interpret the past (my caper) but predicting what’s going to happen in the future is another kettle of fish altogether.

A significant unknown is whether the Anthropocene impacts will negate the forces that would normally cause a change from inter-glacial to glacial.

Then there’s asteroid strike  :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 18, 2020, 08:19:18 am
Then there’s asteroid strike  :o
While I don't want to jinx us, I have to say it's very unlikely to happen in the time scale that humanity has already existed in. Also humans like immediate explanations, so they favour the asteroid as it is not something that quietly creeps up on you like a cancer, but at the moment more and more evidence is building the Deccan Traps played a much bigger role than the asteroid, and the resulting long term climate shift left dinosaurs defenceless against something as simple as fungai, but we may never know!

When people start referencing asteroids, I often wonder what the chances of a new Tambora or Krakatoa, Australia in particular should be treating this seriously in conjunction with Indonesia and New Zealand, and the effects could well be global. Yet we(governments) stand by while Italy jails seismologists, it doesn't fill me with a lot of confidence about humanity!

Interesting aside, tectonics was basically unknown when Milankovic postulated his cycles!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 18, 2020, 09:46:39 am
It’s relatively easy to interpret the past (my caper) but predicting what’s going to happen in the future is another kettle of fish altogether.

A significant unknown is whether the Anthropocene impacts will negate the forces that would normally cause a change from inter-glacial to glacial.

Then there’s asteroid strike  :o

Apparently this has already occurred and we are roughly 100 years late.

The issue I have is determining correlation vs causation.  We would be polluting at a much higher rate today than we were 100 years ago simply by volume.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on December 18, 2020, 09:47:44 am
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/17/australias-newest-coal-fired-power-plant-deemed-worthless-by-japanese-owner
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 18, 2020, 10:17:56 am
Yes, this is clearly the trend, my only concern is a sceptical one.

I have grave doubts about the economics and bona fides of the renewable sector that lead to this push, and if they hold up without subsidy, in fairness much of fossil fuel is subsidised as well but that doesn't mean the push to change to renewable shouldn't happen.

I suspect the companies involved in the production of renewable solutions, Solar POV and Wind, will become next decade's version of Nike and Adidas. They basically export rainbows to wealthy nations built on the skeletons of the downtrodden, with pristine labs and corporate facilities that are a mere facade over the filth of progress. Battery industries might be even worse, perhaps not in the manufacture within those ludicrous architectural wonders of Californian factories, but in the procurement of resources down some hellish Congolese mine.

Those Apple supplier riots currently happening in China, the renewable sector might well be next! :o

It's a massive assumption to conclude rare earths are cleaner to mine than coal or steel, and a massive assumption that carbon offsets in Australia or some other Western Wealth compensate for rampant emissions in a country like China or India. No matter what the spreadsheet suggests, a tree planted here is not an offset of gas or heavy metals issued there, the ledger isn't balanced as they are not like for like. You can't compensate for those emissions, that is just a trick of accounting, you have to stop them at the source.

A colourful associate put it this way;
Shoving a unlimited quantity of calcium carbonate up my bum won't save me from drinking cyanide, the location is all wrong!
(He's an engineer, apparently calcium carbonate is used to mop up cyanide in during production of some alloys.).

In any case, it's not like those emissions are stopped at the border by customs!

I wonder if the forces behind the green push are as willing to look as hard at their own, certainly at the moment the answer seems to be no!

Anyway, ...................... NIMBY!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on January 21, 2021, 08:52:20 pm
https://theconversation.com/engineers-have-built-machines-to-scrub-co-from-the-air-but-will-it-halt-climate-change-152975
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on January 21, 2021, 09:00:05 pm
https://theconversation.com/forget-about-the-trade-spat-coal-is-passe-in-much-of-china-and-thats-a-bigger-problem-for-australia-153300
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on January 21, 2021, 09:02:39 pm
https://theconversation.com/worried-about-earths-future-well-the-outlook-is-worse-than-even-scientists-can-grasp-153091
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 21, 2021, 11:00:21 pm
https://theconversation.com/forget-about-the-trade-spat-coal-is-passe-in-much-of-china-and-thats-a-bigger-problem-for-australia-153300
China is the world's biggest supplier of steel, India is the second biggest, coal is a critical part of the process and about 70% of the world's steel uses coal as part of the production process not just for energy but for coking. Coking uses twice as much coal as power stations.

Neither country has enough of it's own iron ore or coal to keep up manufacture without foreign support.

If China stops buying coal it is shooting it's own exports in the foot!

The general public get sold on no coal fired power, that's fair enough, but it's only a very small part of the picture not just because power stations are diminishing or being replaced by nuclear, but because even existing coal fired power stations are much more efficient than they were a decade ago. However, coking coal is a different issue, and our government knows that the world isn't going to stop making steel any time soon. If production of steel stops or pauses for a while the price of our ore and coal goes up when demand returns!

People think they are being greener by using steel framed homes instead of cutting trees! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on January 21, 2021, 11:17:59 pm
Quote
Origin Energy has unveiled plans to build a giant 700-megawatt capacity battery at its coal-fired power plant in Eraring, south of Newcastle, in the New South Wales Hunter region.

If built, Origin said it would have capacity to supply that power to the grid for four hours.

If the plan goes ahead, the battery would be more than four times larger than the 150-megawatt Tesla battery in South Australia.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-12/largest-battery-in-australia-to-be-built-at-nsw-coal-fired-plant/13050642

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 15, 2021, 02:04:45 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-are-big-batteries-and-how-could-they-reshape-the-electricity-grid-20210211-p571qm.html
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: spf on February 15, 2021, 02:25:19 pm
It is interesting reading all the various links and opinions, I have yet to really see something like Pole shift added to the discussion. Considering its potential effect, I would have thought this would receive more air time. Perhaps they cannot do anything about it so just focus on what they perceive can be influenced.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 15, 2021, 03:12:54 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-are-big-batteries-and-how-could-they-reshape-the-electricity-grid-20210211-p571qm.html

First article I read this morning. Good read. The smart power companies will already be well down the road of investing in this and other new power creation / support technologies and the people behind them. And when the money goes in that direction, a light-bulb will illuminate suddenly above the heads of far right politicians.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 15, 2021, 03:23:11 pm
It is interesting reading all the various links and opinions, I have yet to really see something like Pole shift added to the discussion. Considering its potential effect, I would have thought this would receive more air time. Perhaps they cannot do anything about it so just focus on what they perceive can be influenced.
Fascinating subject that doesnt get much air time, the magnetic field created by earth gives us protection and any shift or weakening opens us up to a lot of different problems.
Plenty of attention to what is going on above ground and in the atmosphere but not to much media about the inner core and liquid outer core and effects from volcanoes, lava flows, polar vortexes, and of course will the poles reverse some time again?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 15, 2021, 03:34:36 pm
Fascinating subject that doesnt get much air time, the magnetic field created by earth gives us protection and any shift or weakening opens us up to a lot of different problems.
Plenty of attention to what is going on above ground and in the atmosphere but not to much media about the inner core and liquid outer core and effects from volcanoes, lava flows, polar vortexes, and of course will the poles reverse some time again?

From my understanding its not a matter of IF they will reverse again, but when.

As for how that would effect us? AFAIK, it would essentially leave the world without power instantly.

I'm sure people are working on what to do when this happens, but i reckon we are all screwed when it does.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 15, 2021, 03:41:53 pm
From my understanding its not a matter of IF they will reverse again, but when.

As for how that would effect us? AFAIK, it would essentially leave the world without power instantly.

I'm sure people are working on what to do when this happens, but i reckon we are all screwed when it does.
Not quite, it potentially leaves us without a protective magnetosphere for a period of time but our human built power generation won't be affected in anyway other than the possibility we are all irradiated and can't turn it on!

I think @spf might have been referring to the drift in the position of the North and South poles, which is far more likely to have an impact within the next few thousand years.

By the way, the flip and the drift are different events. The poles are always drifting, they never stop moving. The flip in effect is a collapse of the field, a bounce effect then and return to normal that takes about 20K to 30K years.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 17, 2021, 12:54:52 pm
https://theconversation.com/how-new-design-patterns-can-enable-cities-and-their-residents-to-change-with-climate-change-152749
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 17, 2021, 01:35:58 pm
https://theconversation.com/how-new-design-patterns-can-enable-cities-and-their-residents-to-change-with-climate-change-152749
I've read some articles about how some European countries are already changing planning design, cities become less compact, retain more natural space. I think it's a good thing. There is far more emphasis on walking and bicycles and far far less on cars and motorbikes.

The thing that struck me was the exact opposite of the 60s and 70s, row after row of engineered masonry block buildings warming and cooling with the sun, the new successful designs were far more of a horses for courses approach, no one solution fits with diversity ultimately ruling!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 17, 2021, 01:56:58 pm
https://theconversation.com/how-new-design-patterns-can-enable-cities-and-their-residents-to-change-with-climate-change-152749

Firstly, Pauly, thank you for starting this extremely important thread.

Mrs Baggers and I are looking to move (again), very soon. Ponsing up the house to sell -- going like hotcakes on the Island at present -- getting a half acre block (approx) hour to hour and a half east through to northwest of the city and building a very small home (not quite one of the tiny / container homes phenomena - but close) and aiming for self-sufficiency in most respects - grow our own veggies (been doing that for years), electricity, water capture and so on. I'd have to go to a butcher for meat as I couldn't grow and slaughter an animal. I had the very good fortune a few years ago to bump into Paul West in Tilba whilst on holiday and we had a great chat about self-sufficiency. Terrific bloke.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 17, 2021, 03:22:20 pm
@Baggers
Whereabouts are you finding half-acre blocks nowadays?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 17, 2021, 04:02:11 pm
@Baggers
Whereabouts are you finding half-acre blokes nowadays?
At the bar probably!

(https://www.phillymag.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/11/beer-belly.jpg)

Or maybe a Trump rally!

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4064/4647534300_f035d23b8a.jpg)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 17, 2021, 04:03:21 pm
Fair call LP. Fixed.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 17, 2021, 04:04:31 pm
Fair call LP. Fixing.
We all knew I couldn't resist!

Unfortunately on those photos it takes one to know one! :(
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 17, 2021, 04:08:48 pm
We all knew I couldn't resist!

Unfortunately on those photos it takes one to know one! :(
When you said "at the bar", i was going to say "better than in the mirror"
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 17, 2021, 04:15:32 pm
When you said "at the bar", i was going to say "better than in the mirror"
 Alas, age may well have wearied me, but booze certainly has!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 17, 2021, 07:09:18 pm
Firstly, Pauly, thank you for starting this extremely important thread.

Mrs Baggers and I are looking to move (again), very soon. Ponsing up the house to sell -- going like hotcakes on the Island at present -- getting a half acre block (approx) hour to hour and a half east through to northwest of the city and building a very small home (not quite one of the tiny / container homes phenomena - but close) and aiming for self-sufficiency in most respects - grow our own veggies (been doing that for years), electricity, water capture and so on. I'd have to go to a butcher for meat as I couldn't grow and slaughter an animal. I had the very good fortune a few years ago to bump into Paul West in Tilba whilst on holiday and we had a great chat about self-sufficiency. Terrific bloke.

Always a pleasure Baggers, and best of luck to you with the move.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 17, 2021, 08:04:45 pm
@Baggers
Whereabouts are you finding half-acre blocks nowadays?

South & West Gippy, just north of Woodend, around Creswick - that kind of ring around the city. No chance anywhere on the Mornington Peninsula  :(  :(  (my sister has 3 acres in Tyabb & my brother has a qtr acre in Hastings... but they got in early). I've always been the family nomad, the traveller.

Spotted One - got a good laugh from the guts acreage but can assure you this little black duck has never had a guts like that - one of the upsides of PTSD... anxiety sure does burn calories!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 24, 2021, 02:37:27 pm
The final report of the Australian Tidal Energy (AUSTEn) three-year project to map Australia’s tidal energy resource in detail and assess its economic feasibility and ability to contribute to the country's renewable energy needs:

https://arena.gov.au/assets/2020/12/tidal-energy-in-australia.pdf

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2021, 03:09:36 pm
The final report of the Australian Tidal Energy (AUSTEn) three-year project to map Australia’s tidal energy resource in detail and assess its economic feasibility and ability to contribute to the country's renewable energy needs:

https://arena.gov.au/assets/2020/12/tidal-energy-in-australia.pdf
Yes, there are lots of these turning up after Carnegie went belly up. There is big dollars involved, and I wish Mako well, but having CSIRO or UQ as research partners might not help them. There could be some nice technologies developed on the side along the way, as long as the partners are prepared to recognise spins offs, sometimes they are too myopic.

My problem is the claims around potential grow with every round of funding renewal, and that growth in claim often far outstrips the real world performance improvement. I'm not a naysayer just as sceptic, I've been seeing this stuff for over a decade now from the likes of SIMEC and it's precursors companies that went the same was as Carnegie. I thought the best chance was from an older technology version called vertical access turbines, think of a giant version of one of those spinning signs you see on the pavement outside shops and cafés. They at least rotate slower but with large spans they have massive amounts of torque to drive geared generators.

There is a great page that keeps track of this stuff here;
http://www.emec.org.uk/marine-energy/tidal-developers/
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2021, 03:24:54 pm
On the wave power systems, they have to be enormous, like a hot air balloon held 15m below the ocean waves.

In tropical environments the problem of biofouling becomes unworkable, and the solutions to that are expensive which drives up the cost of energy. This often then becomes a few times the cost of solar which is already a few times the cost of nuclear, and you don't need batteries or big hydro-storage dams for a nuclear plant. There is a reason why France has the cheapest power, and supplements a huge chunk of the European grid including the green ones.

I wish both sides would argue a case free of subsidies.

btw., Hydro is probably the dirtiest source of energy, they started to realise this when studying cyclic flooding which released lots and lots of methane. Methane is many times worse than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas but shorter lived, not that the shorter longevity matters much if you cyclically replace what is lost!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 24, 2021, 03:34:55 pm
https://au.news.yahoo.com/david-attenborough-warns-earth-faces-collapse-of-everything-015738425.html
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2021, 03:47:05 pm
https://au.news.yahoo.com/david-attenborough-warns-earth-faces-collapse-of-everything-015738425.html
He laments the lack of action, the ongoing rhetoric which seems to last forever, but a problem for all of us is the flip side which is acting very swiftly is full of charlatans and profiteers, many linked to politicians.

Much like the COVID situation if it's not carefully monitored, those jerks selling Hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin as a miracle cure or prophylactic, the green energy initiatives are just there to be milked by pricks looking for a fast buck masquerading as venture capitalists. When the government funding for Carnegie started to dry up, all of a sudden the boosters saw immutable road blocks and departed very swiftly!

When you read the spin, these inventions are all miracles, unbelievably simples cures for our energy economy, yet they all in the final paragraph list the need millions or billions from governments to get off the ground. It's a tell, because if the invention was any good at all, someone like GE or Siemens would buy them out without a single tax payer dollar to be seen!

btw., There have been some very good spin-off inventions come out of this energy research, ironically they were mostly bought out by the Saudi's or the USA, and shelved!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: flyboy77 on February 25, 2021, 06:45:50 am
https://au.news.yahoo.com/david-attenborough-warns-earth-faces-collapse-of-everything-015738425.html

The old bloke lost his marbles years ago.

How are the climate clowns going to spin this one....?

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 25, 2021, 07:30:46 am
A stooge for the panic merchants.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: flyboy77 on February 25, 2021, 07:56:26 am
Here's one for LP to drum up some ad hominem attack over....

https://clintel.org/new-presentation-by-john-christy-models-for-ar6-still-fail-to-reproduce-trends-in-tropical-troposphere/?mc_cid=1f85683f49&mc_eid=5965e22311
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 25, 2021, 08:17:12 am
Here's one for LP to drum up some ad hominem attack over....

https://clintel.org/new-presentation-by-john-christy-models-for-ar6-still-fail-to-reproduce-trends-in-tropical-troposphere/?mc_cid=1f85683f49&mc_eid=5965e22311
People discussing what you post isn't a personal attack, never is and never was, you thinking that is possibly paranoia though.

As for the article, just debating how fast climate change is happening isn't denying that it's happening, although I suspect climate change deniers will latch onto it. The debate about whether climate change is happening is over, long ago, the debate is now turned to how fast it's happening. Shocking! :o

As the graphs in the article show, one goes up, ......................... and the other one goes up too! Even at 0.5°C it's dramatic because that 0.5°C is a number taken from a global average where the two extremes, the minimum and maximum temperatures, move further apart! ;)

(https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5266.0;attach=981;image)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 25, 2021, 09:00:18 am
The old bloke lost his marbles years ago.

How are the climate clowns going to spin this one....?



Sigh. Another graduate of the Max Delbrück School Of Wit : "I don't understand this. It must be wrong."
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 25, 2021, 09:34:18 am
Sigh. Another graduate of the Max Delbrück School Of Wit : "I don't understand this. It must be wrong."
(https://media.tenor.com/images/f02d401e5d06e5c6066779bd822b31ea/tenor.gif)
@PaulP, I'm not really bothered by those who do not understand.

What really grinds for me are those who demonstrate the ability to comprehend yet choose to deliberately oppose the science and data for political, economic or social purposes, all the while recruiting an oblivious army of drones built from those who cannot comprehend themselves. Those "active deniers" are truly insidious, merchants of misery and destruction for their own perverted benefits! People like Alan "Hannibal" Jones or Andrew "Voldermort" Bolt.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 27, 2021, 06:29:11 pm
Yeah, nah!

The climate is stable and it's all good  ::)

https://theconversation.com/the-texas-deep-freeze-left-the-state-in-crisis-here-are-3-lessons-for-australia-155760
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 27, 2021, 06:58:39 pm
Yeah, nah!

The climate is stable and it's all good  ::)

https://theconversation.com/the-texas-deep-freeze-left-the-state-in-crisis-here-are-3-lessons-for-australia-155760


America has more than enough money and knowledge to deal with something like this. This is what you get when you privatise utilities :

https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/what-a-warming-australia-can-learn-from-a-frozen-texas-20210225-p575yn.html.

On day two the Fox News star host Tucker Carlson told his viewers that “a reckless reliance on windmills is the cause of this disaster,” and claimed that “the windmills froze, so the power grid failed”.

On the third day of blackouts former Texas governor Rick Perry said Texans would happily endure more “to keep the federal government out of their business” while current governor Greg Abbott appeared on another Fox News program to blame renewable energy.
........................................................

He blamed the Green New Deal, a set of environmental policies championed by left-wing Democrats and partially embraced - though mostly not yet implemented - by the Biden administration.

Tim Boyd, mayor of Colorado City - which is in fact a small Texas town - told his citizens that “only the strong will survive and the weak will [perish]” in a blog post.

“No one owes you [or] your family anything; nor is it the local government’s responsibility to support you during trying times like this!” he said. “Sink or swim it’s your choice! The City and County, along with power providers or any other service owes you NOTHING! I’m sick and tired of people looking for a damn handout.”



The country is a complete cesspit of lies and corrupt ideology.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 27, 2021, 08:23:58 pm
America has more than enough money and knowledge to deal with something like this. This is what you get when you privatise utilities :

https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/what-a-warming-australia-can-learn-from-a-frozen-texas-20210225-p575yn.html.

On day two the Fox News star host Tucker Carlson told his viewers that “a reckless reliance on windmills is the cause of this disaster,” and claimed that “the windmills froze, so the power grid failed”.

On the third day of blackouts former Texas governor Rick Perry said Texans would happily endure more “to keep the federal government out of their business” while current governor Greg Abbott appeared on another Fox News program to blame renewable energy.
........................................................

He blamed the Green New Deal, a set of environmental policies championed by left-wing Democrats and partially embraced - though mostly not yet implemented - by the Biden administration.

Tim Boyd, mayor of Colorado City - which is in fact a small Texas town - told his citizens that “only the strong will survive and the weak will [perish]” in a blog post.

“No one owes you [or] your family anything; nor is it the local government’s responsibility to support you during trying times like this!” he said. “Sink or swim it’s your choice! The City and County, along with power providers or any other service owes you NOTHING! I’m sick and tired of people looking for a damn handout.”



The country is a complete cesspit of lies and corrupt ideology.

Reprehensible and irresponsible comments. Your final sentence, Pauly... spot on. Just appalling comments in the face of suffering citizens.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 27, 2021, 08:37:00 pm
Reprehensible and irresponsible comments. Your final sentence, Pauly... spot on. Just appalling comments in the face of suffering citizens.

That country is beyond the point of no return. Ercot received warnings that their system would not cope with high demand in winter, they did f@ck all to rectify the situation because it would eat into profits.

Chris Hedges lives in Princeton NJ, one of the wealthier places in the US, and has this to say :

I live in Princeton, N.J., which is an enclave of the one per cent, and when it rains, the power goes out, and not only that, but the phone lines go down. It’s all falling apart.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/09/10/analysis/end-times-american-democracy-interview-chris-hedges

And let's not forget Enron and the 2000-01 California Electricity Crisis :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000–01_California_electricity_crisis

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 28, 2021, 07:31:03 am
That country is beyond the point of no return. Ercot received warnings that their system would not cope with high demand in winter, they did f@ck all to rectify the situation because it would eat into profits.

Chris Hedges lives in Princeton NJ, one of the wealthier places in the US, and has this to say :

I live in Princeton, N.J., which is an enclave of the one per cent, and when it rains, the power goes out, and not only that, but the phone lines go down. It’s all falling apart.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/09/10/analysis/end-times-american-democracy-interview-chris-hedges

And let's not forget Enron and the 2000-01 California Electricity Crisis :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000–01_California_electricity_crisis


And that's why I maintain the needless pandering and ass licking by us of that moron of a nation needs to stop. Just a bunch of imbeciles.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 28, 2021, 12:28:23 pm
https://theconversation.com/texas-was-a-warning-australia-needs-to-rethink-the-design-of-its-electricity-market-155856
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 28, 2021, 12:31:44 pm
https://theconversation.com/texas-was-a-warning-australia-needs-to-rethink-the-design-of-its-electricity-market-155856

Thank you, Pauly, for introducing me to The Conversation some time ago. I get their daily news and along with a couple of others, they are my 'must reads' of the day. Such a pleasure to read objective, informed journalism.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 28, 2021, 12:36:55 pm
Thank you, Pauly, for introducing me to The Conversation some time ago. I get their daily news and along with a couple of others, they are my 'must reads' of the day. Such a pleasure to ready objective, informed journalism.

Thanks. Yes, I agree. I'm sure many on the right will think it's full of leftist academics who are "out of touch with reality" lol.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 28, 2021, 01:15:13 pm
Thank you, Pauly, for introducing me to The Conversation some time ago. I get their daily news and along with a couple of others, they are my 'must reads' of the day. Such a pleasure to ready objective, informed journalism.
You can get the new Podcast to listen to as well, if you are so inclined.

The Conversation has gone off a bit in recent years, it was more balanced when it first started but is now slowly becoming swamped by socialist political opinion. It hardly ever use to post political commentary when it started, but back then it had very little humanities content!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 28, 2021, 04:00:30 pm
https://theconversation.com/texas-was-a-warning-australia-needs-to-rethink-the-design-of-its-electricity-market-155856
USA is a lot different to Australia, the American electrical grid overall was built in the 60's and has been poorly maintained because suppliers are investor based companies looking to save money and pay shareholders. Its a hybrid mixture in technology which will always fall over with even slight extremes in weather.
Wind Turbines give practically nothing to the grid in Australia so this source failing/freezing isnt relevant to us, a lot of the States in the USA run as independent nations unlike Australia where Victoria and NSW for example are happy to help each other and also help South Australia that has trouble supplying especially in outer areas and also struggles during extreme heat.
The Texas grid is isolated and connected to nothing else, in tropical(joking) Canada its different....Every Canadian province along the U.S. border is electrically interconnected with a neighbouring U.S. state or states, with many provinces boasting multiple international connections. The result is a reliable grid on both sides of the border.
Its not a retail problem its a political problem causing a technical problem.


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 28, 2021, 05:41:40 pm
Texas is simply today's bad example. The culture that gives rise to their predicament is rampant, and manifests itself at all levels of American society.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 28, 2021, 07:28:54 pm
Texas is simply today's bad example. The culture that gives rise to their predicament is rampant, and manifests itself at all levels of American society.

The 'values (prejudices/arrogance)' of 1963 still live in many Texans - they really believe they are a nation unto themselves. And you are right, Pauly, those same 'values' live in tens of millions of US citizens outside Texas as well - mostly southern and through the middle!!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on March 10, 2021, 10:40:11 am
The Yallourn power station is closing 4 years ahead of schedule.  Economics is proving to be a major factor in turning away from fossil fuel.

Yallourn currently produces 5% of our power.

Apparently, our largest storage battery will be constructed on the site.

This sends a very strong market signal to renewable power companies.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2021, 11:01:30 am
The Yallourn power station is closing 4 years ahead of schedule.  Economics is proving to be a major factor in turning away from fossil fuel.

Yallourn currently produces 5% of our power.

Apparently, our largest storage battery will be constructed on the site.

This sends a very strong market signal to renewable power companies.
I hope those batteries have better longevity, support and warranty than those '25 year' solar cells, many of which are forked after just 3 to 5 years and the companies that installed them long long gone. They are basically China's rubbish that we are importing!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on March 10, 2021, 11:26:01 am

They won't
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2021, 11:39:55 am
They won't
The media report about these batteries like the spend is once off, based on my experience with industrial UPS I'll be surprised if that sort of facility isn't fully refreshed with new batteries and cooling fans every 5 to 7 years. The ongoing cost must be horrendous, but I bet that won't appear in the report!

Knowing our politicians, they'll leave it switched off like the Desalination plant and when we go to use it the lot will have corroded and sprung leaks everywhere! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on March 10, 2021, 12:14:28 pm
And if we'd built a dam 15 / 20 years back?   Look at the charges on your water bill and what % component is for just the H2O.  I don't mind new technology at all (save for Windows 10 insofar as PCs go) but how dumb can you be to embrace the "next big thing" and abandon the old and proven.   
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2021, 12:51:59 pm
I don't mind new technology at all (save for Windows 10 insofar as PCs go) .......
Actually, Win 10 is pretty good these days, from a business perspective probably the best version of Windows ever.

 btw., If you still have Win 7, 8 or 8 Pro you can probably still get the free upgrade.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on March 10, 2021, 01:04:31 pm
Still got my late wife's Dell PC i5 laptop which came with W7. I remember she accepted the offer of a free W10 upgrade which just absolutely stuffed it. It was a nice laptop with W7. I ended up taking it to the local PC support guy who reverted it back to W7 and made sure it would no longer upgrade to W10. I suppose W7 is no longer supported, I haven't fired it up for a long time now.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on March 10, 2021, 01:22:24 pm
Still got my late wife's Dell PC i5 laptop which came with W7. I remember she accepted the offer of a free W10 upgrade which just absolutely stuffed it. It was a nice laptop with W7. I ended up taking it to the local PC support guy who reverted it back to W7 and made sure it would no longer upgrade to W10. I suppose W7 is no longer supported, I haven't fired it up for a long time now.

W10 is excessively intrusive and I will never use it.  Despise the interface plus it doesn't support my email program.  I HATE it.  Yep Cookie, support for 7 finished a few months back but mine still hums along.  There's a few freeware programs out there (Never 10 being one) that deny any access to a W10 install.

EDIT - I don't believe 10 is any longer offered as a FOC upgrade
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2021, 02:01:58 pm
All I can say is we've now migrated more than 95% of a moderately sized business network to Win 10 and have little or no problems, and in most cases our users tell me performance has improved over Win 7 or Win 8 on the same old hardware. I've a few users who complain a bit, but mostly coming from users who complain about any change at all, even if it's to brand new hardware.

I've really only had two PCs that had genuine problems, and these were related to very specific hardware bugs. I've had to retire a couple of legacy printers but note that Windows Update has since made drivers available so if I'd kept them they'd still be running.

I can advise, that the up to date experience of Win 10, is quite different from when it was first launched, they've greatly extended hardware and software support for legacy applications and hardware. I also find remotely managing or assisting users is a far better experience under Win 10 than 7 or 8, 8 was a real nightmare and perhaps only beaten to the worst ever title by Vista. I'm not a fulltime IT Admin though, so perhaps my comments are out of place.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on March 10, 2021, 02:46:15 pm
Yep, we might hear from Thry on this but Vista was a flea infested dog.  Windows ME even worse. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on March 10, 2021, 02:59:26 pm
@LP

I am a happy user of W10 on my standalone HP laptop, which I believe has the latest version. My problems were with the Dell which just did not want to run under W10 and it became an absolute nightmare, so much so that I took the drastic action of reverting it to W7. That was a few years ago now.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2021, 03:10:52 pm
@LP

I am a happy user of W10 on my standalone HP laptop, which I believe has the latest version. My problems were with the Dell which just did not want to run under W10 and it became an absolute nightmare, so much so that I took the drastic action of reverting it to W7. That was a few years ago now.
I don't doubt your experience @cookie2‍, but I will tell you on our network we have PCs with far older processors than i5 that run Win 10 comfortably so don't give up! It's this ability to unify the OS for old and new hardware that partially drove the decision.

Alternatively, if you'd like to try something completely different, download and boot a live CD or DVD of something like Linux Mint (https://linuxmint.com) for that older hardware, you might find it delivers it a new lease of life! It's a version of Linux that has been skinned to be reasonably familiar for WinXP or Win7 users, and we use it whenever we have cause to migrate a workstation to Linux. Some people swear by the Cinnamon edition, but my preference is Mate which older Linux / Unix users will understand why.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on March 10, 2021, 05:04:14 pm
I hope those batteries have better longevity, support and warranty than those '25 year' solar cells, many of which are forked after just 3 to 5 years and the companies that installed them long long gone. They are basically China's rubbish that we are importing!

The company that owns the Yallourn power station is Chinese so you never know.

The one being built at Moorabool is Tesla so that should be reliable and long term.  Interestingly, the South Australian Tesla battery has saved SA consumers for than $150M since it commenced operations in 2017.  With the recent upgrade to 150MW, the current cost of the SA battery is $160M.  SA is almost at break even and that's not considering the benefits of avoiding blackouts when the Heywood Interconnector was out of action for three weeks around this time last year.

The media report about these batteries like the spend is once off, based on my experience with industrial UPS I'll be surprised if that sort of facility isn't fully refreshed with new batteries and cooling fans every 5 to 7 years. The ongoing cost must be horrendous, but I bet that won't appear in the report!

Knowing our politicians, they'll leave it switched off like the Desalination plant and when we go to use it the lot will have corroded and sprung leaks everywhere! ;D

I suspect that the batteries require no more in the way of maintenance and upgrades than any other component of our power network and the SA battery costs include a major capacity upgrade.

I'm not a huge fan of the desalination plant.  Using recycled water would be cheaper and more energy efficient.  However, the plant has been producing 125GL annually for the last couple of years.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on March 10, 2021, 06:05:03 pm

Yallourn currently produces 5% of our power.


Where did that figure come from DJC?  It's over 20%.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on March 10, 2021, 06:10:03 pm
@LP

Thanks for all the insights LP, but it sounds a bit technical for me at my stage of increasing senility. I'm pretty happy with my HP W10 laptop so I don't really feel inclined to drag out the old Dell and start tinkering.

(https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/confused-senior-man-gm184597915-17880219)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on March 11, 2021, 09:11:36 am
Where did that figure come from DJC?  It's over 20%.

That was the figure I heard with the closure announcement but I think they meant “one fifth” rather than 5%.  Yallourn currently produces 1,450 megawatts and supplies 22% of Victoria's electricity.

Given the additional 5,000 megawatts of clean energy coming on line in the next 7 years, it’s easy to see why Energy Australia has decided to close Yallourn earlier than scheduled.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on March 11, 2021, 09:13:32 am
The EU is about to hit Australian imports with a tariff for inadequate action on reducing fossil fuel emissions.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 11, 2021, 10:01:52 am
Look at how far clean energy and battery technology has come in the last 20 years and imagine how far it will advance in the next 20 years. I wouldn’t be surprised if  upgrading batteries will be worthwhile in 5-10 year cycles from an efficiency and safety point of view. I don’t see too many laptop owners wanting to ditch LiPo batteries and revert to NiMH batteries.

On the other hand, how much has coal-fired electricity generation improved over the last 50 years and how much Improvement can we expect in the next 50 years in reducing pollutants? And I mean real improvements rather than the white whale of “clean coal” which just seems to be a shiny object to deflect criticism or justify lobbying for government handouts.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 11, 2021, 10:07:18 am
Australia is a global leader in all the key areas, solar cells, hydrogen, emissions reduction and battery technology. But our local researchers get so poorly funded by the government the inventions are immediately sold off by the parent institutions to foreign investors, then Australia has to buy the technology back as just another ordinary consumer.

If we were serious about Australia's two biggest long term issues, energy and water, we'd have built a nuclear plant next door to a desalination plant decades ago, and right now we'd be planning it's redundancy in the next 20 to 30 years while emitting near zero carbon in the interim!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on March 11, 2021, 01:19:49 pm
Australia is a global leader in all the key areas, solar cells, hydrogen, emissions reduction and battery technology. But our local researchers get so poorly funded by the government the inventions are immediately sold off by the parent institutions to foreign investors, then Australia has to buy the technology back as just another ordinary consumer.

If we were serious about Australia's two biggest long term issues, energy and water, we'd have built a nuclear plant next door to a desalination plant decades ago, and right now we'd be planning it's redundancy in the next 20 to 30 years while emitting near zero carbon in the interim!

Nuclear is so far advanced anything else in terms of power output its ridiculous. It's all about the environment with nuclear power....but coal is probably worse for the environment. Call it a marketing exercise to change the thinking and be done with it already.

In terms of Aussies selling ideas overseas....this really needs to be looke at.
Pony up the dollars for proper research and development now and see the benefits for generations.

We have the brains.
We have the desire.
We have the resources.
We have the technology.
We DONT have the backing.
It's ludicrous.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 11, 2021, 01:24:24 pm
Nuclear is so far advanced anything else in terms of power output its ridiculous. It's all about the environment with nuclear power....but coal is probably worse for the environment. Call it a marketing exercise to change the thinking and be done with it already.
Just an aside, many people in conventional power argue for coal as a safe alternative to nuclear, but the truth is emissions from coal power contain more radioactive isotopic waste than is ever emitted by a nuclear plant even if the nuclear plant fails. It's just that the coal radioactive emissions are trickled out over the lifetime of the facility, distributed evenly through thousands and thousands of cubic kilometres of emissions, in a way it may actually be more insidious!

Green energy initiatives can be even more harmful, relying on very dirty industries to create rare earth elements and engineering metals. It's just that because the processing is NIMBY, people ignore the damage it does and declare what they import as green! btw., Much of those green assessments are based on 25 year lifetimes, we are hearing much about that at the moment. My associate who inspects installations for solar and wind calls it the great green fraud!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on March 11, 2021, 03:39:39 pm
Whenever anyone asks me about Green energy, I remember the Prius.

Has anyone seen one recently, and do they know anyone that still drives one?

I wonder what they do when they are disposed of?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 11, 2021, 03:44:59 pm
There is so much politics in this, it's almost impossible to make genuine progress or sense of it.

I think I've mentioned this once before, when working in Asia I would come across whole factories that were built to sell green manufacturing into the EU, so that they get a CE tick of approval. But the real factory doing the bulk of the work was a dark dank and dirty sweatshop down the road that would become a wasteland in the future, that was the EU version of a NIMBY moment. Yet now they will place sanctions on Australia for not doing enough, when all the EU has really done historically is move it's waste offshore!

A friend in the UK is particularly sceptical, his side gig is home farmed free range chicken eggs. Under the EU, he wasn't permitted to sell them locally, roadside or direct to the public, the stores nearby his home had to sell eggs trucked in from Belgium, Netherland or some other eastern block country which had the EU approved green stamp! Ignoring thousands of kilometres of diesel fumes for every tray of course!

When it suits it seems that the rules change!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on March 20, 2021, 03:40:16 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/the-beasts-to-our-east-what-are-el-ninos-and-la-ninas-20201209-p56lya.html

From a couple of months ago. A great explanation of El Niño and La Niña.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on July 02, 2021, 11:40:36 am
Nice "What if" article on CNET regarding nuclear and climate change.

https://www.cnet.com/features/is-nuclear-power-the-missing-piece-of-our-climate-change-puzzle/

This article ultimately gets to the point of discussing pebble bed reactors, they are the nuclear industry Tesla compared to Chernobyl's Model T, and much much safer with an intrinsic design that needs intervention just to keep running, the exact opposite of old systems that can runaway chain react if their isn't intervention to stop it.

But you won't hear that from the climate change protestors because they have too much money tied and invested into renewables, even if they don't really make sense or fulfil the promises.

Australia is dead set stupid if given it's resources it does not to get on board with these technologies, they can form the 24x7 fundamentals of new export energy technologies like clean hydrogen, which needs energy itself just to produce. Further in Victoria, clean energy can be used to convert brown coal into a plethora of urgently needed chemical compounds, and Vic has one of the world's richest reserves of brown coal that will eventually become redundant to the energy sector, why not make a clean environmentally friendly use of it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on July 02, 2021, 06:18:11 pm
That was the figure I heard with the closure announcement but I think they meant “one fifth” rather than 5%.  Yallourn currently produces 1,450 megawatts and supplies 22% of Victoria's electricity.

Given the additional 5,000 megawatts of clean energy coming on line in the next 7 years, it’s easy to see why Energy Australia has decided to close Yallourn earlier than scheduled.

Main reason is falling electricity prices and the rising costs of maintaining  the 1970's infrastructure.
Energy Australia is just a front for the Chinese Light and Power Company who fully own the business and if it aint making money  then they dont want to know. Earnings for fully Aus Power Companies are on the slide thanks to heavy regulation and they wont be investing much back into the system so we all know what that means and thats Foreign investment to make things happen and gradually a lot of the Fully owned Aus companies will be swallowed up or go under.
Coal becoming redundant....?...Chinese love our coal, burns better and they are sick of the rubbish that Russia and Saudia Arabia sell them. When the Sabre rattling with China stops and its business as usual then that coal might be useful in funding new power sources. The reality is a lot of those companies like Energy Australia alias CLP  will be the ones building nuclear reactors in Australia and advancing Solar/Wind power etc.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on July 12, 2021, 03:38:23 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/12/the-government-must-take-responsibility-for-the-great-barrier-reef-and-stop-looking-for-someone-else-to-blame
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on July 15, 2021, 07:54:34 am
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/14/amazon-rainforest-now-emitting-more-co2-than-it-absorbs

At some point in the near future, covid will become a manageable infectious disease, a part of the background hum. But the impending ecological catastrophe (the one Murdoch and his more debased flunkies assures us is a hoax), isn't going anywhere.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on July 15, 2021, 08:11:31 am
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/14/amazon-rainforest-now-emitting-more-co2-than-it-absorbs

At some point in the near future, covid will become a manageable infectious disease, a part of the background hum. But the impending ecological catastrophe (the one Murdoch and his more debased flunkies assures us is a hoax), isn't going anywhere.
Hi @PaulP‍ , is this the result of clearing?

I recall the Attenborough doco talking about this inversion that occurs, when too much forest structure is damaged or altered the forest changes from CO2 absorbing to CO2 emission, with the effects worsened by changing rainfall/weather patterns.

It's not hard to draw a parallel between the Gladys' COVID response and the lack of climate change action, when they eventually flip and they will far sooner than the deniers realise, it will be too late and the price paid will be beyond the trivial inconvenience we would have suffered for early action. If the nutter brigade thought COVID lockdowns were intolerable, God help them when the real aggressive climate action starts! in the meantime local cancels ban wood burning and gas heating, but carry on laying millions of square meters of asphalt day after day after day, but they put electric cars on it! :o

Interestingly, COVID airfares are a slice of what is to come, $40K each way to the UK!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on July 15, 2021, 09:37:41 am
A bigger ecological disaster is the irresponsible disposal of masks.

They arent recyclable, and a year and a half later, given how actually effective they are, we may as well revert everyone to non disposable washables because most dont wear them properly, change them often enough, and stuff them in and out of their pockets anyway. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on July 15, 2021, 09:59:47 am
A bigger ecological disaster is the irresponsible disposal of masks.
I agree that the way masks are misused and discarded is a disaster, but I don't think mask abuse is a bigger issue than climate change, as time passes Sars-Cov-2 won't even be a bigger issue than climate change! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on July 15, 2021, 10:46:26 am
Hi @PaulP
Interestingly, COVID airfares are a slice of what is to come, $40K each way to the UK!

Exactly why Bain capital wasted their money buying Virgin.  But hey, let's ban airlines to save the planet ...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on July 15, 2021, 10:55:57 am
Exactly why Bain capital wasted their money buying Virgin.  But hey, let's ban airlines to save the planet ...
Yes, people are bitching and moaning about not being able to go on their Bali holiday as a restriction to their freedom of choice.

But they don't see that what they perceive as a freedom and fundamental right is in fact a service delivered by a commercial entity, and soon that will be taken away by market forces way beyond their own control or any government control. What a freaking disaster that will become for the liberty nutters, and they will still deny contributing to the problem!

Yearly holidays might go back to being a once in a lifetime event like they were for people post war, work and save up to have one big world trip on retirement and that's it!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on July 15, 2021, 03:58:17 pm
I agree that the way masks are misused and discarded is a disaster, but I don't think mask abuse is a bigger issue than climate change, as time passes Sars-Cov-2 won't even be a bigger issue than climate change! :o

They contribute to climate change this isn't a zero sum game.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 23, 2021, 02:28:25 pm
I see Tesla is being sued by the Federal Regulator for failing to deliver on the promised performance of the "The Big Battery", ........ why am I not surprised?

This won't be the first Green Energy "base load" solution that is found to be somewhat rubbery, like many cheap solar panels they will promise physical law defying performance, that unforeseen by any green energy executive or salesperson falls somewhat short of expectation in the longer term.

In the mean time SA can keep piping in NSW and Vic coal based base load by the carbon rich tonne, as they say in the sausage maker state, NIMBY!

Bring on nuclear, clean green base load 24x7, that can when paired with the appropriate desalination plant provide cheap clean drinking water by the gigalitre, and soon well have plenty of locally trained retiring naval officers looking for a nuclear energy job! We can sell it to SA and Tassie at thrice the price it costs to make!

Sub base at Hastings, Mornington or Swan Island anyone?

Win Win! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on September 23, 2021, 03:56:59 pm
Elon Sucks
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 13, 2021, 11:35:27 am
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/oct/13/news-corps-andrew-bolt-says-his-companys-climate-campaign-is-rubbish

Certainly gave me a chuckle.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 11:46:42 am
Interesting though there are rumours of a breaking story that is going to pull apart the dirty side of clean energy, I'm not surprised.

Like with any fanatical effort it sounds like some of the Clean Energy / Renewable Apparatchiks have been gilding the lily to push their case, I'm not surprised big money is at stake.

Through work I've been through some facilities in China that make solar as well as big batteries, and I've always said that I think the concept of clean renewable energy only persists because it is clean in my backyard. It is NIMBY clean, especially for the EU Inspectors. The Chinese have showroom factories that look like operating theatres and get the tick of approval from the EU inspectors, those facilities are always down for maintenance or testing a bespoke small product run when inspectors visit. A few kilometres down the road or in the next town over is the sweatshop bucket chemistry facility that churns out the bulk of the 'clean green product' in mass manufacturing conditions that are an entirely different kettle of blackened fish! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 13, 2021, 11:49:31 am
Yep.  There is often creative accounting used with Green energy.

I think its fundamentally a good idea, but the efficiency of most green energy sources just isnt high enough to offset the total manufacturing and disposal process.

We keep kyboshing Nuclear, but you can get a lot of fuel out of a much smaller amount of it mined, with very small amount of waste, and if the same amount of energy went into funding research into better waste recycling, we might get a lot further.

Its in its infancy, but nuclear waste is starting to find its ways into batteries that can be used safely in a pacemaker and run it for a very long time. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 11:53:00 am
We keep kyboshing Nuclear, but you can get a lot of fuel out of a much smaller amount of it mined, with very small amount of waste, and if the same amount of energy went into funding research into better waste recycling, we might get a lot further.
Note France just announced a new generation of what they are describing as small nuclear. I suspect it will be based on pebble bed reactors that are just big enough to run a suburb, do not need cooling and are basically a disaster / attack hardened battery the size of a house that lasts for decades running a single suburb. As an aside I've seen plans for Japanese units the size of a large garden shed / shipping container that can be helicoptered into various disaster zones and supply power for months or years until the rebuild of services are complete.

I assert the timing of the French announcement, our purchasing nuclear subs and our outstanding / cancelled contract with France are not a coincidence! What is the chance that contract is replaced with a good faith commitment for $90B worth of small nuclear facilities? ;)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 13, 2021, 12:20:15 pm
Whether clean energy is as clean as its proponents make out is only of peripheral interest. It's way better that coal and the technologies currently in use. This line of argumentation leads very quickly and easily to inaction.

Clean energy is only one piece of the jigsaw puzzle. One needs to consider transport, building construction and other aspects as well.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 12:31:11 pm
Whether clean energy is as clean as its proponents make out is only of peripheral interest. It's way better that coal and the technologies currently in use. This line of argumentation leads very quickly and easily to inaction.

Clean energy is only one piece of the jigsaw puzzle. One needs to consider transport, building construction and other aspects as well.
In segments of this debate there can be significant differences between clean and zero carbon.

My major objection is that what we call 'clean' isn't really so clean, and I get the hypocrisy of the 'clean energy' movement labelling some genuine zero carbon alternatives dirty, they seem to lack a mirror! ;)

Clean relative to coal isn't so hard, clean relative to other forms of clean can be a real challenge!

I suspect a great way to identify an energy apparatchik is to find they advocate one size fits all!

Many of us are here today because of ANSTO, we've either been treated, scanned or traced using radioisotopes produced in Sydney. A facility the green clean energy movement want closed as a dirty relic of the past, yet inside it is cutting edge, far more modern than any major solar cell production facility!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on October 13, 2021, 12:33:51 pm
When the CSIRO says the cost is one trillion to transition to 100% clean, pretty simple equation.  You don't
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 13, 2021, 12:35:06 pm
Renewable is a better word than clean. I'm not sure where "clean" comes from. It is actually renewable. No form of energy is clean, but some are certainly cleaner than others.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 12:38:57 pm
Renewable is a better word than clean. I'm not sure where "clean" comes from. It is actually renewable. No form of energy is clean, but some are certainly cleaner than others.
Solar cells are the industrial waste of the next few decade, they aren't subject to recycling regulations and aren't compatible with most recycling anyway, on average they are unlikely to make it to the stated/rated design life, and disposing of them is not accounted for in the green equations. Renewable is a furphy, because it assumes the solar panels are everlasting, but they are the new asbestos of the 2030s and beyond! Renewable now, but later, not my problem, NIMBY!

FWIW, there are already warehouses around Sydney and Melbourne, filling up with failed, faulty or outdated solar panels waiting for someone to come up with a solution.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 13, 2021, 12:44:09 pm
Whether clean energy is as clean as its proponents make out is only of peripheral interest. It's way better that coal and the technologies currently in use. This line of argumentation leads very quickly and easily to inaction.

Clean energy is only one piece of the jigsaw puzzle. One needs to consider transport, building construction and other aspects as well.

Paul, I will go on record and state if people can debunk my thinking, then do so, but there is an equation that gets missed when calculating the environmental impacts.

Manufacturing.
Disposal.
Cleaning (this one is particularly important for solar panels which wastes a lot of water).
Storage (batteries, lithium, graphite, silicon).
Shipping, and installation.
Real estate.

There are examples of companies selling "clean energy" from batteries that are storing power that are charged using base load coal to compensate for when the sun doesnt shine, or the wind doesnt blow.

There are also a lot of impacts on wildlife, and nature that are not told about when the solar panels become giant death rays thanks to reflection for bird wildlife.

https://abcbirds.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/PP-Solar-Energy.pdf


I will go on record here, and state that I dont have full knowledge of what is right and wrong, and I do agree we need to do what we can in the name of conservation, but a lot of rewnewable energy sources are not that renewable.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 12:57:29 pm
On the environmental impact of large solar arrays I can take the piss out of some of these concepts, for example the plans from Twiggy and Turnbull. They are going to fill the outback with solar arrays, already some flights coming in off the north coast are diverted due to the risk of glare, the algorithm already exists that predicts where planes have to travel to avoid pilots being dazzled.

We can't get people to wear cloth or paper masks walking around in free open spaces, we have no hope of getting them to wear welding goggles while trapped in a plane! ;D

Anyway on a more serious note, I like the concept of transparent disposable printed solar cells, these are just becoming available. In effect you build your large solar facility in a location that allows crops to be grown underneath it, a sort of hybrid solar farm / greenhouse, it really makes sense. But I won't claim they are uber green, because the printable solar panels only have a maximum life span of between 1 and 5 years, just like a plastic covered greenhouse. Glass will last longer but isn't an option due to high cost and weight, the benefit of lasting 10 or 15 years just isn't justified, the printed solar cells aren't as efficient but they are about two orders of magnitude cheaper for the same given area even accounting for disposal or recycling costs.

At the moment though, the industry is targeting the lamination of these printed solar films into glass to provide high rise buildings with solar from windows. To me this is not a sensible use of the technology, but it probably delivers the inventors the highest bang for buck in the short term.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 13, 2021, 12:58:05 pm
Solar cells are the industrial waste of the next few decade, they aren't subject to recycling regulations and aren't compatible with most recycling anyway, on average they are unlikely to make it to the stated/rated design life, and disposing of them is not accounted for in the green equations. Renewable is a furphy, because it assumes the solar panels are everlasting, but they are the new asbestos of the 2030s and beyond! Renewable now, but later, not my problem, NIMBY!

FWIW, there are already warehouses around Sydney and Melbourne, filling up with failed, faulty or outdated solar panels waiting for someone to come up with a solution.

There's no doubt that EOL solar panels are a problem that needs to be resolved. But it will only happen if technology and legislation work together to do things right. There's more to renewable than solar, however.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on October 13, 2021, 01:04:00 pm
And when did any single government plan ever come in on budget?  China gets a free pass on 2050 as they're (supposedly) a developing country that lands probes on Mars !  The rot's started there as they're desperate for clean coal (ours) but can't bring themselves to admit they've stuffed up with their import bans.

Nuclear is the only way to go.  And we've cornered the market on reserves of uranium.  I need add no more as other members have enunciated it well enough.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 01:04:47 pm
There's no doubt that EOL solar panels are a problem that needs to be resolved. But it will only happen if technology and legislation work together to do things right. There's more to renewable than solar, however.
I apologise if I seem cynical and dismissive, but this is an area of R&D I've had some indirect connection to now for over a decade. I've seen all sorts of schemes green or zero carbon gilded and delivered to my desk as the solution, only to find they all depend on the wilful ignorance of the investor. Wind, waves, tide, sun, geothermal, they all have issues, none are what they portray themselves to be! It's my firm opinion the key to a quick sustainable result is diversity and competition, when in fact most spend their time lobbying for protection and exclusivity.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 13, 2021, 02:36:48 pm
And when did any single government plan ever come in on budget?  China gets a free pass on 2050 as they're (supposedly) a developing country that lands probes on Mars !  The rot's started there as they're desperate for clean coal (ours) but can't bring themselves to admit they've stuffed up with their import bans.

Nuclear is the only way to go.  And we've cornered the market on reserves of uranium.  I need add no more as other members have enunciated it well enough.



The fascination with Mars intrigues me.  Fundamentally, I love space, science et al, and on a human level, we need to solve the future problem of what happens when the Sun starts to expand before it retracts to a white dwarf.  Eventually it will swallow the earth, but will be out of energy by then.  Apparently, the moons of Jupiter are more likely to be habitable based on the fact that they have oceans. 

Ultimately, its probably all about Iron Ore as to why the red planet is the most fascinating.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on October 13, 2021, 02:56:06 pm
The fascination with Mars intrigues me.  Fundamentally, I love space, science et al, and on a human level, we need to solve the future problem of what happens when the Sun starts to expand before it retracts to a white dwarf.  Eventually it will swallow the earth, but will be out of energy by then.  Apparently, the moons of Jupiter are more likely to be habitable based on the fact that they have oceans. 

Ultimately, its probably all about Iron Ore as to why the red planet is the most fascinating.

10 billion years from now, the sun will die.  And most likely take the solar system with it.  The oceans are on Jupiter's moon(s) not Jupiter itself.  We should ask Adam Bandit for advice.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on October 13, 2021, 03:00:19 pm
10 billion years from now, the sun will die.  And most likely take the solar system with it.  The oceans are on Jupiter's moon(s) not Jupiter itself.  We should ask Adam Bandit for advice.

I hope we manage to snag a flag before that happens!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 13, 2021, 03:07:42 pm
I hope we manage to snag a flag before that happens!
As ever the eternal optimist!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on October 13, 2021, 03:09:51 pm
As ever the eternal optimist!

Mate, I just can't help it.  :D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 13, 2021, 03:13:01 pm
10 billion years from now, the sun will die.  And most likely take the solar system with it.  The oceans are on Jupiter's moon(s) not Jupiter itself.  We should ask Adam Bandit for advice.
Wont need a Sun,  mankind will be glowing in the dark after countless vaccine jabs and boosters.....
Elon Musk might find mankind a new planet and pronounce himself leader of the Universe...Bonza airlines will be running passenger rockets between the new planet and the old earth.😉

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on October 13, 2021, 03:25:44 pm
Just need an exoplanet and a wormhole EB.  When the JWT (James Webb Telescope) launches in December, we'll eventually get images that'll make Hubble look like a child's 2 dollar toy.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 13, 2021, 06:08:17 pm
10 billion years from now, the sun will die.  And most likely take the solar system with it.  The oceans are on Jupiter's moon(s) not Jupiter itself.  We should ask Adam Bandit for advice.
Isnt that what I wrote?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on October 13, 2021, 06:20:10 pm
Isnt that what I wrote?

My blue ... sorry.  But only Ganymede and Europa likely candidates
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 14, 2021, 01:38:35 pm
https://theconversation.com/humans-are-driving-animals-and-plants-to-the-edge-but-are-we-really-heading-into-a-mass-extinction-168839
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 14, 2021, 01:50:51 pm
https://theconversation.com/humans-are-driving-animals-and-plants-to-the-edge-but-are-we-really-heading-into-a-mass-extinction-168839
The author makes some interesting points.

I heard a podcast recently that covered the loss of primary species, critical species that possibility come out of the author's 1% or 2%  whatever it may really be, and the potential effects on secondary species that can trigger a cascade. That concept put more emphasis on the loss of diversity in specific habitats, rather than simply counting disappearing species which can be a natural event.

I worry greatly about the apparent loss of insects, many of the oldies among us just know without the need for further evidence that things have change dramatically around our cities just since we were kids. Our gardens and home use to be full of bugs of all types, many as common as muck which are now rarely seen. Where are the grasshoppers, caterpillars, plagues of moths around each and every light? I can turn a outside light on at home now and might not see a bug attracted to it in an hour.

FWIW, I try to contribute by logging sightings of marine life using https://www.redmap.org.au, which logs the change in the appearance or distribution of marine life driven from changing water temperatures. I believe there are equivalent websites for birds, native animals, plants and insects.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 14, 2021, 03:32:27 pm
https://theconversation.com/what-is-cop26-and-why-does-the-fate-of-earth-and-australias-prosperity-depend-on-it-169648
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 11, 2021, 04:52:11 pm
https://au.yahoo.com/news/disturbing-change-could-happen-australian-death-certificates-climate-change-021329671.html
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 11, 2021, 05:20:08 pm
While acknowledging climate change is real, I'm not going to discount the historical truth that humans on both sides of this debate contribute equally to the bushfire issues through ridiculous land management politics, and the situation is getting worse not better!

In one regional district, I recently came across a news article reporting efforts by a councillor to move a ban on the planting of gum trees, because they are dangerous in bush fires and storms!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 11, 2021, 05:57:18 pm
While acknowledging climate change is real, I'm not going to discount the historical truth that humans on both sides of this debate contribute equally to the bushfire issues through ridiculous land management politics, and the situation is getting worse not better!

In one regional district I recently came across a news article reporting efforts by a councillor to move a ban the planting of gum trees, because they are dangerous in bush fires and storms!
Bit like wind farms, you need acres of land, trees/bush cleared, native animals gone and then you have to dig up the ground to make your turbines, transformers and substations. Your green power isnt so green when you break it all down to the basic requirements.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: flyboy77 on November 12, 2021, 07:52:56 am
While acknowledging climate change is real, I'm not going to discount the historical truth that humans on both sides of this debate contribute equally to the bushfire issues through ridiculous land management politics, and the situation is getting worse not better!

In one regional district, I recently came across a news article reporting efforts by a councillor to move a ban on the planting of gum trees, because they are dangerous in bush fires and storms!

Why do fires burn intensely?

One simple answer (in terms of what man can control).

Fuel load.

Byrams's Fire Intensity Equation - simple, clear, precise.

The unequivocal standard for nearly 70 years.

I = Hwr

I = intensity (kW/m)

H = heat yield of fuel (J/g)
w= fuel consumed (kg/m2)
r = spread (m/sec)

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 12, 2021, 08:45:19 am
One simple answer (in terms of what man can control).

Fuel load.
Simple algorithmic solutions are bent and twisted by lawyers and politicians on both sides of the argument who change the definition of the terms.

The term "Fuel Load" is a typical example, what is defined as a "Fuel Load" really makes a huge difference in the legislation and even effects the results of scientific studies that have to comply to definitions to receive funding.

Such terms are distorted by both Green Energy and Fossil Fuel advocates, for every Bob Brown there is a Craig Kelly battling each other to define the rules of the game.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on November 12, 2021, 08:59:32 am
I see reports of fusion energy being the silver bullet for future needs are starting to appear again,  with several countries making big investments. This has been discussed ever since I  can remember, a looong time.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 12, 2021, 09:51:57 am
I see reports of fusion energy being the silver bullet for future needs are starting to appear again,  with several countries making big investments. This has been discussed ever since I  can remember, a looong time.
ITER is the frontline effort and it is based in France.

I measure the quality of those fusion predictions against the knowledge that France is committed to building a fleet of next generation nuclear fission reactors. Surely if the fusion solution was genuinely close France wouldn't be doing that! :o

btw., Australia chose not to be involved in ITER, apparently all nuclear fission or fusion is bad for Australia, excluding so long as we can keep selling our uranium to France and China nuclear is NIMBY and therefore uranium sales are all good! ;) A pretty pissweak effort by our politicians and bureaucrats all around, and lacking foresight.

If fusion comes good solar, wind, tidal, geothermal are all dead in the water, none of them can provided 24x7 base load. Fission will also be dead in the water overnight. Hydrogen will also be massively impacted and it will signal the end for fossil fuels. So not being part of fusion research is pretty short-sighted.

I'm not surprised we are not involved in ITER or KSTAR. I remember driving past protestors to get into the Synchrotron in Clayton when it was being built, apparently when they switched it on a black hole would form over Monash Uni and we were all going to disappear up our own sphincters! Some of those protestors back then are probably politicians and bureaucrats now!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 18, 2021, 11:00:03 am
It looks like the USA has given the go ahead for Bill Gates energy group to build it's demonstrator Natrium reactor.

It's based on a long standing design using molten sodium that has been used in nuclear subs for decades, and is also a technology that is used in solar thermal. Sodium melts at relatively low temperatures, ~ 100°C.

It will also be the same fundamental technology the French use for small modular reactors Macron announced.

https://natriumpower.com

https://nuclear.gepower.com/build-a-plant/products/nuclear-power-plants-overview/prism1

Do you still think it's coincidence we've now bought into nuclear subs?

I see this as the fastest way to net zero, and far more sustainable than the renewables sector which seems to ignore the limited availability of rare resources in it's solution.

I suspect the step beyond this will be pebble bed reactors, bridging the gap that ultimately ends in fusion.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 20, 2021, 11:40:43 am
I've become more and more disillusioned with Australia's lack of focus on global issues, in particular the complete absence of foresight by our politicians.

We are perfectly situated to build an economy that can be globally dominant in future energy generation methods, in particular nuclear, solar, batteries and hydrogen. But we are so beholding to lobbyists on both sides of the debate we have lost our way. Our politicians have become nothing more than gutless poll driven bureaucrats, often as an adjunct they are driven by minority religious or political ideologies over real world economics, facts and figures.

Australia talent is leaving it's shores faster and faster, some of the world's next generation of clean and green energy are developed and administered by Australian talent, but not here in Australia.

The public read nuclear as dirty fission, and the polls reflect the opposition to nuclear, and politicians fold. But nuclear by a modern standard isn't the 1960's plants that have failed to withstand the rigours of time. Modern nuclear is both Fusion and Fission, it's cleaner and safer, and in the case of Fusion not only delivers energy but also a swath of critical by-products most prominently helium that is needed for the operation of all sorts of medical devices, and fusion doesn't produce even a skerrick of nuclear waste!

We should be up to pussy's bow in the development of green hydrogen, ingredients required sunlight to drive solar farms and sea water. Hydrogen can be distributed using our existing pipeline infrastructure, mixed in with existing domestic natural gas supplies to also reduce carbon emissions from cooking and heating as well as to distribute the hydrogen. The hydrogen can be re-separated at the end point using very little energy probably from solar to provide pure clean hydrogen as required. (Imagine you go a fill up your car with hydrogen from the hydrogen station, a station that got it's hydrogen via a pipeline not a truck!) PS; You can fill up a hydrogen car, drive 700km and then stop to fill it up against in about 4 minutes to drive another 700km, not 1hr for 80% charge, total vehicle emissions water vapour, zero rare earths required! 4 minutes for 1400km of range, how much EV charging time does that equate too?

Batteries, Australia is a global R&D leader, in particular in the replacement of rare earth materials in mass produced batteries. At least two companies I know have pioneered massively abundant materials like silicon or sulfur as a replacements for rare-earth materials like lithium, nickel, cobalt and gallium. Both were forced off-shore into foreign ownership to secure funding for the commercial development of the technology.

Solar, the manufacturing of the solar cells we know of on the roof is neither clean or green, but Solar thermal can be uber green, and printable solar equally green. To produce solar thermal you need lots of sun and open space, know anywhere? For green printable solar cells you have to develop a way to recycle old plastics into printed solar cells, guess who, and guess where that technology went auctioned off to a foreign investor for short term gain!

What's the odds we end up buying all that technology back off China in a decade or two, either as a product or under a license for something we invented. In the meantime our politicians chuck chunks of coal at each other!

Rant over!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on December 20, 2021, 11:49:13 am
Looks like the Europeans and Britain have simply shifted from coal-fired power plants to wood-fired power plants: A ‘Green’ Energy Project Leaves A Mississippi Town Gasping For Air (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/biomass-energy-power-plants_n_61bcb6cae4b0a3722477d16a), Huffpost.

How the hell does burning wood qualify for a reduction in emissions?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 20, 2021, 11:51:11 am
Looks like the Europeans and Britain have simply shifted from coal-fired power plants to wood-fired power plants: A ‘Green’ Energy Project Leaves A Mississippi Town Gasping For Air (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/biomass-energy-power-plants_n_61bcb6cae4b0a3722477d16a), Huffpost.

How the hell does burning wood qualify for a reduction in emissions?
It's an accounting spin, you grow the wood, you burn the wood, you grow it again for nett zero!

But nobody claims it's clean, actually it's emissions require more filtration and monitoring that some types of coal, cleaning and filtering technologies some say aren't acceptable for the continued burning of coal! :o

I read a summary once that discussed the asymmetry of carbon uptake and oxygen production during a trees life, variations that are rarely used when calculating the triple bottom line. You can imagine just how scary this is when rules and regulations only talk about sub-totals. If you infinitely extend the reporting cycle you can claim any energy method is eventually nett zero, because it's energy will ultimately result in more life, and life builds itself on carbon! As such many measures are bogus, used by bureaucrats, accountants and spin doctors.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 20, 2021, 04:03:55 pm
I've become more and more disillusioned with Australia's lack of focus on global issues, in particular the complete absence of foresight by our politicians.

We are perfectly situated to build an economy that can be globally dominant in future energy generation methods, in particular nuclear, solar, batteries and hydrogen. But we are so beholding to lobbyists on both sides of the debate we have lost our way. Our politicians have become nothing more than gutless poll driven bureaucrats, often as an adjunct they are driven by minority religious or political ideologies over real world economics, facts and figures.

Australia talent is leaving it's shores faster and faster, some of the world's next generation of clean and green energy are developed and administered by Australian talent, but not here in Australia.

The public read nuclear as dirty fission, and the polls reflect the opposition to nuclear, and politicians fold. But nuclear by a modern standard isn't the 1960's plants that have failed to withstand the rigours of time. Modern nuclear is both Fusion and Fission, it's cleaner and safer, and in the case of Fusion not only delivers energy but also a swath of critical by-products most prominently helium that is needed for the operation of all sorts of medical devices, and fusion doesn't produce even a skerrick of nuclear waste!

We should be up to pussy's bow in the development of green hydrogen, ingredients required sunlight to drive solar farms and sea water. Hydrogen can be distributed using our existing pipeline infrastructure, mixed in with existing domestic natural gas supplies to also reduce carbon emissions from cooking and heating as well as to distribute the hydrogen. The hydrogen can be re-separated at the end point using very little energy probably from solar to provide pure clean hydrogen as required. (Imagine you go a fill up your car with hydrogen from the hydrogen station, a station that got it's hydrogen via a pipeline not a truck!) PS; You can fill up a hydrogen car, drive 700km and then stop to fill it up against in about 4 minutes to drive another 700km, not 1hr for 80% charge, total vehicle emissions water vapour, zero rare earths required! 4 minutes for 1400km of range, how much EV charging time does that equate too?

Batteries, Australia is a global R&D leader, in particular in the replacement of rare earth materials in mass produced batteries. At least two companies I know have pioneered massively abundant materials like silicon or sulfur as a replacements for rare-earth materials like lithium, nickel, cobalt and gallium. Both were forced off-shore into foreign ownership to secure funding for the commercial development of the technology.

Solar, the manufacturing of the solar cells we know of on the roof is neither clean or green, but Solar thermal can be uber green, and printable solar equally green. To produce solar thermal you need lots of sun and open space, know anywhere? For green printable solar cells you have to develop a way to recycle old plastics into printed solar cells, guess who, and guess where that technology went auctioned off to a foreign investor for short term gain!

What's the odds we end up buying all that technology back off China in a decade or two, either as a product or under a license for something we invented. In the meantime our politicians chuck chunks of coal at each other!

Rant over!

This conversation will never be a real one, until a nuclear policy isnt automatically an election loser.

No one wants one on their door step, and no one will vote in a government that will go that policy.

Here is the reality.

We are going to go "clean" and "green" with renewables.

Then, when the coal plants are all retired, and we are suffering consistent and frequent loss of power endangering, lives, infrastructure, and the ability for humans to live properly, then and only then will a nuclear plant be palatable to the masses.

I have read recently about an initiative, where nuclear waste, can be combined with man made Diamonds, to create battery storage technology that is almost perpetual.

This will never make it to market, because being the cynic that I am, it equates to a loss of future revenue for too many companies.

Make of that what you will.

IF we actually reviewed things properly, we should see a graph which shows how many GJ of power, all the energy sources can contribute, for how long, with how much waste and CO2 emissions produced including the mining, and also what happens at the end of the life of each generation of power.

Blind Freddy would quickly understand that Nuclear is the biggest bang for buck in that equation in terms of more power, from the smallest waste.  Even a hydro dam needs to divert water from eco systems elsewhere threatening habitats for marine life.  Thats an entire ecosystem effected both up and down stream from it.  Meanwhile solar farms are still land hungry, and wind generation is inconsistent at best, AND land hungry.  There isnt a renewable that can compete with nuclear on a power vs waste equation and the discussion NEVER happens.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 20, 2021, 05:08:26 pm
I have read recently about an initiative, where nuclear waste, can be combined with man made Diamonds, to create battery storage technology that is almost perpetual.
The opposition to even get to that stage is immense, because if technology like that works renewables are diminished and renewables is a trillion dollar industry full of lobbyists.

Actually, it sounds to me like a variation of the pebble bed reactor, sometimes referred to as a nuclear battery, similar technologies can be built on different scales from about the size of a fridge up to the size of a skyscraper to provided safe energy on demand. Hitachi and Mitsubishi have a version designed to be used in times of crisis and national disasters, they are about the size of a mini bus and can be helicoptered into disaster zones and hooked up to provide power for thousands of properties at a moments notice.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 20, 2021, 05:12:18 pm
This conversation will never be a real one, until a nuclear policy isnt automatically an election loser.

No one wants one on their door step, and no one will vote in a government that will go that policy.
In Europe and the USA various regions are fighting for Fusion pilot plants to be built in their cities or suburbs, the promise being free energy to local residents for the life of the Fusion plant which is tipped to be 30 to 50 years. All they have to do is agree to it being built. Of course these are 10 to 20 year builds.

The potential emissions are so low that opposing it is like opposing the local hospital putting in a new PET, CT or MRI!

What will hospitals do when the PET or MRI starts to run out of helium, imagine the cost rise long before that happens?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 10, 2022, 11:50:34 am
An update, I've been reading a recent barrage of attacks by "woke" environmentalist groups opposing hydrogen exports from Westernport terminal because the hydrogen to be exported isn't "green" enough, it's made from brown coal conversion process.

But the protestors and reporters never state that these exports are greener than most modern alternatives for bulk hydrogen production, and the hydrogen from coal is really only the initial phase to be supplanted long term by even greener methods that are not yet available at the required scale. FWIW, even the hydrogen from coal people aren't claiming it as the long term solution, it's really just the first step to get the industry up and running, a bit like subsidised wind or solar! ;)

When questioned about this, the protestors then switched tact to focus on environmental damage caused by the ships arriving for export. Ships that would ultimately be powered by some of the hydrogen they carry, emitting water as an exhaust! So what, next they say the ballasts water brings foreign pests.

I think it's a sure fire sign of a disingenuous protest when the focus of the protesters keeps changing.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 10, 2022, 12:28:46 pm
Just wait for albanese to cave in to the insanity of the greens and he most certainly will.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 10, 2022, 12:51:08 pm
Just wait for albanese to cave in to the insanity of the greens and he most certainly will.
I wonder if anyone has ever stopped and actually pondered life under a Green government. I have and it scares the crap out of me.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 10, 2022, 01:25:46 pm
I wonder if anyone has ever stopped and actually pondered life under a Green government. I have and it scares the crap out of me.

GTC ... good to see you back mate :)

1.3% of the world's emissions and this addle brained idiot and his band of fools would still make normal life impossible.  Watch it ramp up from hereon in.  Abject poverty and destitution on a Pyonyang scale.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on February 10, 2022, 02:25:20 pm
We have big issues in general.

In IT terms like blacklist and white list are starting to be moved away from.

Also master and slave devices are going lots of confusion is the likely result. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 10, 2022, 02:42:39 pm
We have big issues in general.

In IT terms like blacklist and white list are starting to be allowed.

Also master and slave devices are going lots of confusion is the likely result.
Did you mean disallowed?

I read somewhere the other day the bloke(he, them, they, it, thing did I miss one I don't want to be accused of pigeon holing anyone!) that hosts Australian Survivor is no longer allowed to say his catch phrase when the teams enter tribal, "Come on in guys!" is banned, because it's a sexist label!

Do these people know of the existence of the word misandry?

Anyway, isn't the use of the term guys, not unlike the use of the word man in the title of the famous book, "The Descent of Man"? (btw., I hear a lobby group is trying to have that book banned as well. They had tried to get it scuppered on religious grounds and failed, now they are having a crack based on sexism!) :o

Personally I'd like the alphabet banned, I find it is exclusive and divisive because I feel I'm not part of LGBQITAX+!, why can't I have a letter or symbol?

Also I notice whenever one of the major categories gets too many members they crack out a new subdivision/subset, I think that is being deliberately bigoted and discriminating against those not in the category or left behind! They want to be part of the whole, provided they can have a special label, is this separatism?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 10, 2022, 03:19:56 pm
GTC ... good to see you back mate :)

1.3% of the world's emissions and this addle brained idiot and his band of fools would still make normal life impossible.  Watch it ramp up from hereon in.  Abject poverty and destitution on a Pyonyang scale.
Cheers Cap. I wouldn't let a Green run a milk bar let alone a state or a country.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on February 11, 2022, 09:32:17 am
Did you mean disallowed?

I read somewhere the other day the bloke(he, them, they, it, thing did I miss one I don't want to be accused of pigeon holing anyone!) that hosts Australian Survivor is no longer allowed to say his catch phrase when the teams enter tribal, "Come on in guys!" is banned, because it's a sexist label!

Do these people know of the existence of the word misandry?

Anyway, isn't the use of the term guys, not unlike the use of the word man in the title of the famous book, "The Descent of Man"? (btw., I hear a lobby group is trying to have that book banned as well. They had tried to get it scuppered on religious grounds and failed, now they are having a crack based on sexism!) :o

Personally I'd like the alphabet banned, I find it is exclusive and divisive because I feel I'm not part of LGBQITAX+!, why can't I have a letter or symbol?

Also I notice whenever one of the major categories gets too many members they crack out a new subdivision/subset, I think that is being deliberately bigoted and discriminating against those not in the category or left behind! They want to be part of the whole, provided they can have a special label, is this separatism?
Yeah thats what I meant (I wrote that one in a hurry).

The terms seem to have origins of clear racism, and I generally don't have an issue with changing the terminology from Black and white list, black and white hat, good vs evil, black vs white, etc but I just spent 2 years learning terminology, about things, that are universally used in industry, just for the woke police to pull the rug out from underneath it, because of racist connotations.

Now, where you sit on that is up to you, but here is my problem with it.  If you reversed the meaning (white for bad, black for good) I would have no issue with that terminology existing, because I dont associate that with racism.  Black hat, darkness is always associated with things that are obscured, and shining a light on things has always been associated with making things visible which is where I think white list, black list still applies accordingly. 

The true racists are the ones that looked at it, and started having an issue IMHO. 

Even master and slave devices.  Sure, the terms originate from slavery, but with slavery being abolished, eliminating the terms from use in a situation where they describe how the devices interact, is a bit simple if you ask me, and makes me wonder why bother.

Still, I am enlightened enough to understand that these terms do generate a bit of angst, so will evolve with the times as required. 

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 11, 2022, 11:03:19 am
The woke brigade can stuff every concession they put forward.  Cupcakes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: townsendcalling on February 11, 2022, 03:28:28 pm
Cheers Cap. I wouldn't let a Green run a milk bar let alone a state or a country.

Check out what the Greens are doing to local government. THAT is where they are slowly infiltrating. Not interested in Rates, Roads and Rubbish, they just and to push their own agenda (bike lanes that take up 3/4 of a main road........support inappropriate nature strip trees that they are unable to maintain or clean up after etc etc)  Watch your next council election, they are all over them like the plague!!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 11, 2022, 03:41:23 pm
Watch your next council election, they are all over them like the plague!!
Already had it in our area, hid their agendas in the lead-up by presenting as moderates, then afterwards out came all the radical agendas, Extinction Rebellion, Animal Rights, Woke Vegan Cancel Culture, etc., etc.. I'll be labelled sexist for writing this, but it was mostly female candidates hiding their agendas, they presented as moderate school teachers or small business owners, and then it all changed!

In some areas where I live they have set-back public services and maintenance programs by 10 years, on top of the pandemic effects. For example, they rallied to protect one tree, at what is projected to be the equivalent cost of more than 3km of local road or footpath maintenance.

In another example, they introduced Stasi like waste sorting monitoring and recycling, using a plethora of bins, so many bins in fact a local engineer calculated that the bins have to last more than 7 years before all the recycling is a break even for not having supermarket bags! And that is without the cost of the wages for the people they send around inspecting bins for illegal content, just stupid policy! Then after all that we found out the waste contractor picks up all the bins and dumps the lot at the same remote hole in the ground because the recycling centres are overloaded with the stuff! The equivalent of paying an A-Grade gardener a travel allowance to come to your garden collect and throw dog turds over the fence on your behalf!

Finally, the Coup d'état. Once they have their little agendas settled, they feck off leaving a pile of undealt with shizen in their wake!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 11, 2022, 03:50:22 pm
Check out what the Greens are doing to local government. THAT is where they are slowly infiltrating. Not interested in Rates, Roads and Rubbish, they just and to push their own agenda (bike lanes that take up 3/4 of a main road........support inappropriate nature strip trees that they are unable to maintain or clean up after etc etc)  Watch your next council election, they are all over them like the plague!!
I live in the council that are the biggest bunch of f-wits in the country bar none. You know, the one that signed up to the treaty and banned nuclear weapons. I emailed them and asked them when does the amnesty start and where do I hand mine in. No response to date.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 11, 2022, 04:08:28 pm
Far Left and far Right - the natural enemies of common sense and intelligence. The lunatic fringes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on February 11, 2022, 04:29:51 pm
Far Left and far Right - the natural enemies of common sense and intelligence. The lunatic fringes. 

Finally something to agree with !

Who would have thought that cycling could bring civilization to its knees… 🙄
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 11, 2022, 04:35:01 pm
In some areas where I live they have set-back public services and maintenance programs by 10 years, on top of the pandemic effects. For example, they rallied to protect one tree, at what is projected to be the equivalent cost of more than 3km of local road or footpath maintenance.

Finally, the Coup d'état. Once they have their little agendas settled, they feck off leaving a pile of undealt with shizen in their wake!

I had a run in with one of them in a Kew polling booth.  Set up a card table on the nature strip, sat down with his BS material and relaxed in his chair while all other parties dutifully stood and did their part, Liberal and Labor alike.  Suffice it to say the green had an ugly Saturday after I finished with him.  Packed up his broken table and left.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 11, 2022, 09:43:50 pm
Finally something to agree with !

Who would have thought that cycling could bring civilization to its knees… 🙄

Who would have thought everyone else must pay for their traffic lanes  ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on February 12, 2022, 01:41:15 am
Who would have thought everyone else must pay for their traffic lanes  ::)

And they don’t pay rego !!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 12, 2022, 06:00:16 am
And they damn well should ! :)  With plates as well
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 12, 2022, 09:08:47 am
Nothing like keeping healthy by riding your bike along Beach Road, making sure to take good, deep breaths... Making sure those car exhaust fumes go deep into your lungs.  ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 12, 2022, 09:26:56 am
Nothing like keeping healthy by riding your bike along Beach Road, making sure to take good, deep breaths... Making sure those car exhaust fumes go deep into your lungs.  ::)

So you don't have a car @Baggers ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on February 12, 2022, 09:59:19 am
And they damn well should ! :)  With plates as well

On ya Einstein 👍🏼
What we really need is more ice vehicles, more pollution, more obesity, more clogged up hospitals for those people, we need to build more car parks and get rid out those pesky tree things whilst we’re at it 👍🏼
What a wonderful world it could be… 🙄
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 12, 2022, 10:18:38 am
On ya Einstein 👍🏼
What we really need is more ice vehicles, more pollution, more obesity, more clogged up hospitals for those people, we need to build more car parks and get rid out those pesky tree things whilst we’re at it 👍🏼
What a wonderful world it could be… 🙄

Got better things to do with my day than indulge you  8)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on February 12, 2022, 10:45:40 am
So much world to fork up, so little time…
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 12, 2022, 05:00:29 pm
So you don't have a car @Baggers ?

I was trying to have a subtle sarcastic dig at cyclists on main thoroughfares  ;)  ;)  I was having a dig at those who bike ride to stay fit -- in traffic!! Exposing themselves to extra fumes and going under a vehicle, not to mention rooting up the road traffic.

When we were still in Melbourne and using the Beach Road regularly -- by car -- those &%$**## cyclists were the bane of my existence. Had a few run-ins with some of the more arrogant ones who'd ride many abreast and completely fck up traffic. COckheads.

So to answer your question, CC old cock... yep, got a car... And no fcking treadly.  ;D

But I also take NBs point. Though to stay fit I choose working out at home or in a gym - places where I can keep fit and not root things for others. In the years to come electric cars will help reduce emissions but cyclists on main roads and in busy traffic will put their lives at risk and stuff up traffic flow. And there's a little known medical reality that the treadly seat numbs the perineum, risking prostate health in men.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on February 12, 2022, 05:36:07 pm
I love a good dose of sarcasm @Baggers :)  But I had one very bad run in with this mongrel who nearly collected me full bore at a tram stop in Melbourne and told me to get out of his way as he rode thru .... two days later, payback
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on February 12, 2022, 10:03:45 pm
“Payback”
Really…?
What a fine specimen of humanity you must be, what a guy indeed 👍🏼
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 24, 2022, 11:53:19 am
Many are pointing to the heavy investment in batteries by traditional oil companies as a sign the internal combustion engine is dead and buried.

Perhaps the people commenting are too young to remember Sarich and his revolutionary orbital engine, and how the heavy investment in his technology by traditional automotive giants panned out!

Given the heavy investment in hydrogen powered vehicles by the like of Mercedes and Toyota, and the potential for hydrogen combustion to bridge the gap between conventional combustion and fuel cell technology, I think the proclamation is premature. Plus from an investment perspective, hydrogen combustion fits right in with existing plant workflows.

Also, I think the concept of generating your own "at home hydrogen" using solar, for on demand use by storage in a MOFs, also has huge potential to smash the battery based industry. To be competitive with the Hydrogen / MOFs technologies, in the absence of subsidies, batteries need to become an order of magnitude cheaper much longer lasting and fully recyclable.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on May 30, 2022, 11:42:33 pm
From the Guardian:

Quote
'Back in 2017, AGL was publicly heavied by the Turnbull government after it announced the early closure of its Liddell coal plant in New South Wales. The Coalition argued long and loud that the company should significantly delay the closure or sell it to another operator that would.

AGL’s then chief executive, Andy Vesey, persisted with his plan to replace Liddell with renewable energy and storage, but ended up leaving the company in August 2018. It was later revealed that Josh Frydenberg, then the environment and energy minister, had called AGL board members to suggest they get rid of him.'

Now it’s clear that Mike Cannon-Brookes has stopped AGL’s “de-merger” and will move the company away from coal-fired power generation.  Cannon-Brookes says that will result in lower prices for consumers and I suspect that he knows what he’s talking about.

It’s probably not such an issue with a Labor government but it’s good to know that successful business folk can counter government inaction.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on May 31, 2022, 03:25:26 pm
From the Guardian:

Now it’s clear that Mike Cannon-Brookes has stopped AGL’s “de-merger” and will move the company away from coal-fired power generation.  Cannon-Brookes says that will result in lower prices for consumers and I suspect that he knows what he’s talking about.

It’s probably not such an issue with a Labor government but it’s good to know that successful business folk can counter government inaction.
Cannon Brookes pounded Shareholders with anti board propaganda and won them over when he said Dividends would be reduced with the split. AGL is an income share and not one you buy for growth so even some of the super funds like Hesta were spooked and were going to vote No given they would be affected by reduced dividends.
The AGL board are incompetent which has seen the share price fall dramatically over recent years, Cannon Brookes has made the point the only way forward for AGL and other similar companies is foreign investment to meet early climate change targets and rejig the business ie him and his private investment company Grok ventures kicking in the money. AGL dont have all the money needed unless they have a capital raise which will drop the share price and I dont see Albo kicking in the sort off money needed to turn the dirtiest energy provider in Australia into the cleanest.
About 10-100 billion needed to upgrade all the transmission lines in Aus to handle all the new solar/wind power and what most people dont know is the method of transmission will need to be changed from AC to DC transmission if you want to do it right and that means conversion stations being built and maintained and that means big money.
I'm going to give Cannon Brookes the benefit of the doubt that he hasnt pulled this move just to lower the share price so he can make another full take over bid at a cheaper price but in his propaganda to shareholders he never explained how he is going to deliver on his promises or where the money is coming from. He says he wouldnt do that because he would lose money himself as a 11% shareholder but that all depends on how cheap he gets it for so we will have to wait and see what his next move is...
I will disclose I am a disgruntled shareholder....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: capcom on May 31, 2022, 04:22:31 pm
I'm going to give Cannon Brookes the benefit of the doubt that he hasnt pulled this move just to lower the share price so he can make another full take over bid at a cheaper price

Don't worry EB ... energy prices will drop.  This promise, from the goose who wanted the government to buy Virgin with public money.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on July 06, 2022, 10:45:29 am
While I confess to being a bit of technology advocate, and I love the peak performance of sporty EVs, I have to say I'm a bit disenchanted reading the latest reports on the performance and environmental credentials of current EVs.

It seems if you live inner city, doddle about on 5 or 10 minute trips here or there, on back roads and side streets, they are far superior to fossil fuel vehicles. City or combined cycle is the tag for this, but the minute you step on the freeway (freeway cycle) those green credentials turn into concrete like environmental impact.

(PS; The environmental credentials seem to depend on having previously driven your fossil fuel vehicle into the ground and replaced it with an EV that you intend to keep for at least 120,000k, some say as much as 160,000k. If you replaced your petrol guzzler early before it's use by date, you will never recover the environmental cost of the two vehicle builds, and God help the grid if everybody does it! )

It appears the Lithium ion battery solution is just are not optimised for energy efficiency at sustained freeway speeds, and even more disturbing the longevity of the battery components is slashed for vehicles that operate predominantly in freeway mode. I heard one podcaster make the claim if you care about the environment you must leave your EV parked and hire a hybrid for that long road trip. Not sure that is true, but it's a bit of a tell about the real life performance versus the marketing!

I suppose I should not be surprised, tradies have known for years that Lithium ion batteries are best performed when used in regular short bursts. They deliver heaps of power but to deliver maximum life they should be recharged regularly and not drained if you want them to last and last, repetitive deep cycling / draining or constant demand slashes the longevity figures.

The more I look into this, the clearer it becomes that for heavy transport, long range or freeway operation green hydrogen is the way to go, but we just do not have access to the infrastructure.

It also seems the new big vehicle emissions push is being targeted towards tyre particulates, where your rubber meets the road and pulverises is killing the children and destroying the planet, not even EVs can escape that one. You can see where this is heading!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 11, 2022, 04:55:29 pm
Interesting news coming out of the US, with researchers announcing a process to strip 6000kg or carbon form the atmosphere to produce 1000kg of ethylene.

Why is this important, we use ethylene to make plastics, everything from food packaging to vinyl siding for housing. You could have packaging and building products that are effectively net-negative carbon, taking more carbon out of the atmosphere than they create, assuming the do-gooders don't ban the plastics in such products.

If it can be scaled it's a huge game changer, but I'm cynical as it has to scale and it has to make it past woke politics.

I bet there is a shift in the debate regarding carbon capture and storage, the anti-CCS supporters will need to shift in emphasis against some other aspect of mining or energy production.

What will be the anti-xxx debate if it turns out you can use this process to produce solar PV panels which is net carbon negative from the very first day, not just after a decade or two of continuous use, rather than using solar PV structures made from carbon emitting metals, ceramics and glasses.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 11, 2022, 05:21:33 pm
While I confess to being a bit of technology advocate, and I love the peak performance of sporty EVs, I have to say I'm a bit disenchanted reading the latest reports on the performance and environmental credentials of current EVs.

It seems if you live inner city, doddle about on 5 or 10 minute trips here or there, on back roads and side streets, they are far superior to fossil fuel vehicles. City or combined cycle is the tag for this, but the minute you step on the freeway (freeway cycle) those green credentials turn into concrete like environmental impact.

(PS; The environmental credentials seem to depend on having previously driven your fossil fuel vehicle into the ground and replaced it with an EV that you intend to keep for at least 120,000k, some say as much as 160,000k. If you replaced your petrol guzzler early before it's use by date, you will never recover the environmental cost of the two vehicle builds, and God help the grid if everybody does it! )

It appears the Lithium ion battery solution is just are not optimised for energy efficiency at sustained freeway speeds, and even more disturbing the longevity of the battery components is slashed for vehicles that operate predominantly in freeway mode. I heard one podcaster make the claim if you care about the environment you must leave your EV parked and hire a hybrid for that long road trip. Not sure that is true, but it's a bit of a tell about the real life performance versus the marketing!

I suppose I should not be surprised, tradies have known for years that Lithium ion batteries are best performed when used in regular short bursts. They deliver heaps of power but to deliver maximum life they should be recharged regularly and not drained if you want them to last and last, repetitive deep cycling / draining or constant demand slashes the longevity figures.

The more I look into this, the clearer it becomes that for heavy transport, long range or freeway operation green hydrogen is the way to go, but we just do not have access to the infrastructure.

It also seems the new big vehicle emissions push is being targeted towards tyre particulates, where your rubber meets the road and pulverises is killing the children and destroying the planet, not even EVs can escape that one. You can see where this is heading!
40% of new carsales are of the ute variety in Aus......there are no EV utes that can do what the present combustion engine type utes do at the moment and the prices are astronomical much like the size of the batteries that take up the base of the car. You are adding a small size car in battery weight as well as asking folk to pay twice as much for the vehicle itself.
I just dont see vehicles like the Ford Lightning, GM Hummer, Rivian etc gaining traction in Aus when conversions are required for the steering assembly etc and the retail price being so high and lack of service and parts.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on September 12, 2022, 03:57:01 pm
“....there are no EV utes that can do what the present combustion engine type utes do at the moment…”

What exactly is that ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 12, 2022, 04:05:05 pm
What exactly is that ?
I'm with @ElwoodBlues1 on this issue, as light commercial type vehicles EV are well off the mark.

EVs don't have the range or the flexibility under light commercial use conditions, I think the trick for the light commercial market will be Hydrogen / Hybrid type vehicles. Most trade types do a fair bit of travelling to and from sites, usually on freeways, typically fully loaded, the EV performance and range plummets under those conditions.

I do get that most utes are sold to weekend warriors who mostly drive between home and Bunnings, but to get the commercial business a different level of capability is needed that EVs do not deliver at the moment.

Secondly, there is the Toyota issue, there are reasons certain utes, 4WD and vans dominate the tradie market, it's because they are ubiquitous, if you drive 600km to a job and break down you can find spare parts around the next corner.

I suspect agriculture will arrive at a similar conclusion, hydrogen / hybrid. OS it looks like EU countries are making big strides in this direction, with heavy transport heading towards hydrogen. If it works for trucks, it should work for tractors, van and utes.

I did see a nice solar PV pump application recently, solar PV is well suited to applications with short repetitive cycles like a farmer running a lift pump to fill water troughs. You can charge the batteries when the sun shines and use the pump on demand as required. But the ROI is long, it takes a few years of not buying fuel to get to the break even point. I saw it's primary benefit as more of an automation, time management issue.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on September 12, 2022, 04:13:23 pm
For what its worth, I heard someone on radio say that the Ford Ranger (the new one) has been made wider to suit electrification down the track. Don't if anyone here knows anything about it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on September 12, 2022, 04:15:48 pm
Interesting LP, I seem to have heard a fair bit of noise about busses and heavy trucks… I would have thought they were quite a reasonable simile for tradie vehicles ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 12, 2022, 04:18:50 pm
For what its worth, I heard someone on radio say that the Ford Ranger (the new one) has been made wider to suit electrification down the track. Don't if anyone here knows anything about it.
I know in the USA Ford is making changes to accommodate future electrification, in some form, but even so they are some way off being viable for a broad audience.

When the car companies started announcing EV Utes, trucks and buses, the do-gooders switched focus to the pollution left on and around roads, in waterways and in the air as dust from the "crumbling tyres". So expecting to find an widely accepted solution might be ambitious.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 12, 2022, 04:25:01 pm
Interesting LP, I seem to have heard a fair bit of noise about busses and heavy trucks… I would have thought they were quite a reasonable simile for tradie vehicles ?
Trucks as hydrogen are genuinely a general purpose go.

Some trucks and buses are a little bit different in that they drive fixed routes on pre-planned schedules, so you can have in-situ charging facilities at a terminus. One nice plan I saw for buses it inductive charging loops embedded in the road at stops and regular intervals.

Trucks that travel point to point, like from the wharfs to warehouses, are being targeted, but they will have a different setup with interchangeable / quick change batteries. But nobody is talking about where the energy is going to come from, it's magic electricity at the moment.

In Melbourne the main R&D at the moment is being done by people like Hyzon, on hydrogen buses for long range interstate routes, this will translate to trucks as well.

There is quite a bit of R&D going on globally for hydrogen heavy transport, trains and ships, etc. etc. Solar PV / battery is just not viable due to the energy requirements.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on September 12, 2022, 05:10:12 pm
I saw an EV digger being used in the Uk.

Generally speaking, they were able to use it for 2 hours and then had to charge it on a Disel generator to get it going again...

They had a solar panel for the charger as a backup but you know, its the UK.  Only useful in summer when they all take holidays.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 12, 2022, 05:48:05 pm
I know in the USA Ford is making changes to accommodate future electrification, in some form, but even so they are some way off being viable for a broad audience.

When the car companies started announcing EV Utes, trucks and buses, the do-gooders switched focus to the pollution left on and around roads, in waterways and in the air as dust from the "crumbling tyres". So expecting to find an widely accepted solution might be ambitious.
Ford are looking at 5 different EV vehicles and are bringing a transit van to Aus for couriers/tradies........as usual from Ford the BS has has already started with dodgy charging figures. 11kw needed to recharge the battery at home, they say 5-7 hours charge time.....not sure how thats going to happen when  a single phase at 230-240v@32 amps(which is max) only gives you about 7.5kw.
That means you need 3 phase at home or you are waiting 11-12 hours on a single phase charger setup.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on September 12, 2022, 05:56:50 pm
Only from 100% flat EB, and from what I hear the majority of battery’s don’t go below 70%.
A bit like your mobi, you charge it every night and don’t turn it off, my 12 month old iPhone rarely gets below 85%.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on September 12, 2022, 06:31:05 pm
40% of new carsales are of the ute variety in Aus......there are no EV utes that can do what the present combustion engine type utes do at the moment and the prices are astronomical much like the size of the batteries that take up the base of the car. You are adding a small size car in battery weight as well as asking folk to pay twice as much for the vehicle itself.
I just dont see vehicles like the Ford Lightning, GM Hummer, Rivian etc gaining traction in Aus when conversions are required for the steering assembly etc and the retail price being so high and lack of service and parts.

Toyota Australia has formed a partnership with VivoPower to produce battery-electric 70 series LandCruisers for mining company use.  They probably don't need great range but the payload is comparable to combustion-engined vehicles.

Then there's the Ineos Grenadier hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that's currently undergoing testing (and Landrover have been testing fuel cell Defenders for some time).  I think that will be the powerplant of choice for folk who need decent range.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 12, 2022, 06:34:45 pm
Only from 100% flat EB, and from what I hear the majority of battery’s don’t go below 70%.
A bit like your mobi, you charge it every night and don’t turn it off, my 12 month old iPhone rarely gets below 85%.
NT, I believe the NT Govt are banning sales of combustion engine utes from 2030, is that true?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 12, 2022, 06:38:16 pm
Toyota Australia has formed a partnership with VivoPower to produce battery-electric 70 series LandCruisers for mining company use.  They probably don't need great range but the payload is comparable to combustion-engined vehicles.

Then there's the Ineos Grenadier hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that's currently undergoing testing (and Landrover have been testing fuel cell Defenders for some time).  I think that will be the powerplant of choice for folk who need decent range.
DJ, I'm with LP and think Hydrogen cells are probably more the future commercially  in Aus looking forward.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on September 12, 2022, 07:34:33 pm
NT, I believe the NT Govt are banning sales of combustion engine utes from 2030, is that true?

I don’t follow day to day “news” there may be talk/promotion of the idea by someone but I’m not aware of such a concrete proposal by the government.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on September 12, 2022, 08:50:23 pm
DJ, I'm with LP and think Hydrogen cells are probably more the future commercially  in Aus looking forward.

An acquaintance of mine, Robert Pepper, is an automotive journalist and he has investigated and reported on the flaws of EVs when it comes to towing and touring.  He is a big EV fan for commuting but can’t see them meeting our towing/touring requirements.  It’s well worth checking out his website and/or FB page.

Robert famously tested the emergency breaking sensors of a top of the range sedan with a blow up doll from a sex shop.  Sadly, she didn’t survive the experiment 🫤

Some government investment in hydrogen fuel technology wouldn’t go astray.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on September 12, 2022, 09:30:31 pm
There needs to be some kind of giant shift in the thinking of how to implement these vehicle mandates for the future.
That is, demanding no combustion engines is great, but only works if there is a viable alternative. Currently there isn't one.

I have a ranger as a provided work car.
I am expected to be driving around most of the day. It would be rare, but it's possible to hit say 600km in a day. Even if I don't hit those numbers, I'm carrying a fair load around on what I do drive, which will shorten that distance anyway. Now I am expected to charge that for 10-12 hours of a night and be able to do it all again the next day?

What if I have to take the kids to swimming or footy? I can't get my full charge in because of time? Do I require an additional car for private purposes (I mean, I have my wifes car, but if I was single?)

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 13, 2022, 08:11:27 am
Then there's the Ineos Grenadier hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that's currently undergoing testing (and Landrover have been testing fuel cell Defenders for some time).  I think that will be the powerplant of choice for folk who need decent range.
I've read about hydrogen retrofits on combustion type engines but at this stage that won't be a long term solution, it's a just bridging a gap, long term it's surely all about fuel cells which convert the energy far more efficiently.

However, some heavy weights have thrown their hat in the ring recently on the hydrogen combustion path, Mercedes included so I while I'm doubtful I would not bet against them. One solution seems to be a blending hydrogen with a small percentage of LPG, not sure why but apparently this makes the engineering solution much easier, it's probably about how the existing engine designs work. I suppose if you combine something like that technology with a genuine carbon offset process, like using captured CO2 to make the materials in the body as I described above, then you can have a net negative even without zero emissions.

Some problems they have at the moment is how long fuel cells last, how expensive are they to make, and the rarity of some materials.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 14, 2022, 06:52:17 pm
Toyota have just received an award from Greenpeace down under....for being the No 1 anti environmental car maker based on their opposition to climate action and highly polluting hybrids. World wide they have ranked just below by Exon, Mobil and Chevron for their negative lobbying for pollution standards on cars.
Goes against the Toyota marketing spin of being greener than most and having the most trust in Australia, not sure who to believe or what criteria Greenpeace have used and comparisons etc but its not a great look.
Mazda rumored to be boning their 2 litre engine they use on their base model CX5, CX3 and some other model and making customers upgrade to the 2.5 for an extra 5k.....
More frightening is the emergence of MG reaching 7th position in the top ten sales figures, thats ahead now of Subaru and Nissan who should be mighty worried. One new car in every 22 now being sold in Aus is an MG........Mò lǐsī chēkù.....thats Morris Garage in Chinese, be more than a few car companies worried about the rise of the SAIC group and its obvious they will improve heir position given their pricing and ability to offer a lot of choice in models especially EV's. Toyota still comfortably leads the pack but the other car makers would be looking over their shoulder...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on September 14, 2022, 06:58:10 pm
Toyota have just received an award from Greenpeace down under....for being the No 1 anti environmental car maker based on their opposition to climate action and highly polluting hybrids. World wide they have ranked just below by Exon, Mobil and Chevron for their negative lobbying for pollution standards on cars.
Goes against the Toyota marketing spin of being greener than most and having the most trust in Australia, not sure who to believe or what criteria Greenpeace have used and comparisons etc but its not a great look.
Mazda rumored to be boning their 2 litre engine they use on their base model CX5, CX3 and some other model and making customers upgrade to the 2.5 for an extra 5k.....
More frightening is the emergence of MG reaching 7th position in the top ten sales figures, thats ahead now of Subaru and Nissan who should be mighty worried. One new car in every 22 now being sold in Aus is an MG........Mò lǐsī chēkù.....thats Morris Garage in Chinese, be more than a few car companies worried about the rise of the SAIC group and its obvious they will improve heir position given their pricing and ability to offer a lot of choice in models especially EV's. Toyota still comfortably leads the pack but the other car makes would be looking over their shoulder...

Toyota are having all sorts of issues that will hurt them long term.
Apparantly they are struggling to get microchips for their GPS/Displays. They will be (if they are not already) selling cars without said systems in place and customers will have to get them retrofitted once they become available. Would you buy a new car if it didn't come with GPS, Reversing cameras, DAB etc.

Some models will be waiting 18months before it comes with all the bells and whistles promised.
Not sure how well their sales will be going with those kind of delays.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on September 14, 2022, 07:06:05 pm
@EB

I've owned 2 MGs, of the classic variety, in my life EB. Not sure I'm quite ready to buy a Chinese one yet. I had a brief look at one on display in a shopping mall and it looked ok, but if they are anything like the GW suv I drove a few years back then no thanks.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 14, 2022, 07:54:15 pm
@EB

I've owned 2 MGs, of the classic variety, in my life EB. Not sure I'm quite ready to buy a Chinese one yet. I had a brief look at one on display in a shopping mall and it looked ok, but if they are anything like the GW suv I drove a few years back then no thanks.
Cookie, they look ok, drive ok and have reasonable specs but it's the service, support and dealership network that I would be suspicious of.
Sales volume affects spare parts inventory, service tech numbers, training etc...Dealers put money into brands that sell and most blocks where you find new car dealerships with different brands usually are owned by the one company so they invest in the brands that sell the most.
MG should improve in all areas with their sales increasing but Id still be holding off buying one until they are more proven with their service backup.
The old MGs were classic cars, would have been a fun drive you had in yours...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on September 14, 2022, 08:30:43 pm
@EB

You're right EB. I am now living in Yarra Valley and still driving the old IS300. The nearest Lexus dealer is in Blackburn so I would no doubt be even worse off with an MG. I'm seriously thinking of finding an independent service outfit.
The old cars were indeed fun but as I got older I needed more comfort and mod cons!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 14, 2022, 09:36:54 pm
Toyota are having all sorts of issues that will hurt them long term.
Apparantly they are struggling to get microchips for their GPS/Displays. They will be (if they are not already) selling cars without said systems in place and customers will have to get them retrofitted once they become available. Would you buy a new car if it didn't come with GPS, Reversing cameras, DAB etc.

Some models will be waiting 18months before it comes with all the bells and whistles promised.
Not sure how well their sales will be going with those kind of delays.
Toyota are the market leader in sales and have plenty of fans which allows them the ability to absorb those issues and still sell vehicles based on loyalty to the brand.
I wouldn't be waiting 18 months and would want my toys all onboard and would look at other brands but the reality is none of them have your interests at heart only your wallet.Lexus would be my preferred option but you are paying a premium.
My pet gripe at the moment are these long warranties which are just a marketing trap to force you into  long term dealer servicing..Mitsubishi being the worst con with this new ten year warranty, which forces you to have the car serviced at the dealer or you only get the normal five years if you go independent servicing.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 15, 2022, 12:30:30 pm
My pet gripe at the moment are these long warranties which are just a marketing trap to force you into  long term dealer servicing.. Mitsubishi being the worst con with this new ten year warranty, which forces you to have the car serviced at the dealer or you only get the normal five years if you go independent servicing.
We had this happened at work, they worked out that the independents assuming you find a good one, was saving them about 35% each and every service, then COVID hit and a lot of them can't get the parts anymore at reasonable pricing.

I recall some debate back when we looked into Ford vs Mazda for factory twin cabs, and we discovered for the bulk of the vehicle they are about 90% the same. But the price and servicing costs were vastly different, so it was all about market size and how the model they choose to make the money.

Personally, I think Toyota are well ahead of the pack on average, although I've noticed servicing costs starting to rise for them as well. No brand is exempt.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on September 15, 2022, 01:24:10 pm
I have Landcruisers and Prados since 2001, wouldn't swap them for all the tea in China.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 15, 2022, 01:59:47 pm
I have Landcruisers and Prados since 2001, wouldn't swap them for all the tea in China.
Yep tend to agree, especially for private towing, trailers, boats, floats, campers, caravans, in my opinion they are peerless regarding both ride and driver comfort(handling / safety / confidence).
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 15, 2022, 02:35:14 pm
We had this happened at work, they worked out that the independents assuming you find a good one, was saving them about 35% each and every service, then COVID hit and a lot of them can't get the parts anymore at reasonable pricing.

I recall some debate back when we looked into Ford vs Mazda for factory twin cabs, and we discovered for the bulk of the vehicle they are about 90% the same. But the price and servicing costs were vastly different, so it was all about market size and how the model they choose to make the money.

Personally, I think Toyota are well ahead of the pack on average, although I've noticed servicing costs starting to rise for them as well. No brand is exempt.
No doubt Toyota are the market leader and by a long way, my only gripe is they wont bargain with you when looking to buy a new car and show you the door if you question their trade in valuations. They are always right and let you know they dont need your business as they have plenty of other customers.
A lot of dealers now dont buy cars off the company , they just re-sell the company vehicles for a set fee so they claim they cant discount the price. The upside they say is you can buy the same car at the same price anywhere in Australia...just BS marketing from Head Office. Honda and Mercedes run that sales model, the latter think they are doing you a favor and an honor by selling you one of their vehicles at a premium. Honda's sales figures have collapsed over the past couple of years and they have been selling some of their land holdings in Aus so I reckon the future is grim for them as they have boned a few dealers with their new sales model and cut back their range of cars.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on September 15, 2022, 02:49:32 pm
Toyota are the market leader in sales and have plenty of fans which allows them the ability to absorb those issues and still sell vehicles based on loyalty to the brand.
I wouldn't be waiting 18 months and would want my toys all onboard and would look at other brands but the reality is none of them have your interests at heart only your wallet.Lexus would be my preferred option but you are paying a premium.
My pet gripe at the moment are these long warranties which are just a marketing trap to force you into  long term dealer servicing..Mitsubishi being the worst con with this new ten year warranty, which forces you to have the car serviced at the dealer or you only get the normal five years if you go independent servicing.
I used to have a hilux, youbused to get bent over at service time.....big time.

I bought a new triton, with the 10 year warranty....and it's capped price servicing, which they show you from the get go. So much cheaper than the hilux services, even through the dealer.
Ended up selling that after 1 year as I'd got a ranger as a work car.
I loved my hilux, but the ranger is every bit as good to drive, if not better, plus comes with all the bells and whistles and new technology that the hilux doesn't have...and for a cheaper price.

I reckon a lot of Toyota fan boys will certainly look elsewhere once they realise their shiny new toy comes without all the fun stuff. If they start driving something else, they might never go back.
I was a Toyota fan boy, but I'd buy a ranger right now if given the choice...and that's even if the Toyota came with all its gadgets installed at time of purchase.
Without? It's not even close.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 15, 2022, 04:11:59 pm
The upside they say is you can buy the same car at the same price anywhere in Australia...just BS marketing from Head Office.
When they were doing it tough a couple of years back, back when they were basically offering 1% finance to passing skateboarders, we got a terrific deal. When it's 1% finance and fixed price servicing there is not much room to move, so we batered the length of terms and got 10 years instead of the usual 5!

Apparently Toyota head office weren't impressed at all!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 15, 2022, 04:17:58 pm
I used to have a hilux, youbused to get bent over at service time.....big time.

I bought a new triton, with the 10 year warranty....and it's capped price servicing, which they show you from the get go. So much cheaper than the hilux services, even through the dealer.
Ended up selling that after 1 year as I'd got a ranger as a work car.
I loved my hilux, but the ranger is every bit as good to drive, if not better, plus comes with all the bells and whistles and new technology that the hilux doesn't have...and for a cheaper price.

I reckon a lot of Toyota fan boys will certainly look elsewhere once they realise their shiny new toy comes without all the fun stuff. If they start driving something else, they might never go back.
I was a Toyota fan boy, but I'd buy a ranger right now if given the choice...and that's even if the Toyota came with all its gadgets installed at time of purchase.
Without? It's not even close.

I would agree on the Hilux, we had them at my old employer and they were reliable workhorses but they dont drive that great in terms of steering or performance and we switched to Tritons based on overall purchase/ownership cost and they were a lot nicer drive and didnt have so much the truck handling of the Toyota.
Never driven a Ranger but Ford sell a lot of them......so many in fact they were the 2021 market leader in 4x4's in Aus ahead of Hilux.
Speaking of toys another gripe of mine is the marketing of safety equipment on many new cars, the base models usually come with basic safety kit and you have to upgrade with a safety package($k) to get the full kit of safety equipment. Sales staff will guilt trip you into it by suggesting its important for your family to have the full kit onboard...my usual reply is are you saying the base model is unsafe?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on September 15, 2022, 04:32:30 pm
I would agree on the Hilux, we had them at my old employer and they were reliable workhorses but they dont drive that great in terms of steering or performance and we switched to Tritons based on overall purchase/ownership cost and they were a lot nicer drive and didnt have so much the truck handling of the Toyota.
Never driven a Ranger but Ford sell a lot of them......so many in fact they were the 2021 market leader in 4x4's in Aus ahead of Hilux.
Speaking of toys another gripe of mine is the marketing of safety equipment on many new cars, the base models usually come with basic safety kit and you have to upgrade with a safety package($k) to get the full kit of safety equipment. Sales staff will guilt trip you into it by suggesting its important for your family to have the full kit onboard...my usual reply is are you saying the base model is unsafe?

Nice comeback.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on September 15, 2022, 05:00:42 pm
I would agree on the Hilux, we had them at my old employer and they were reliable workhorses but they dont drive that great in terms of steering or performance and we switched to Tritons based on overall purchase/ownership cost and they were a lot nicer drive and didnt have so much the truck handling of the Toyota.
Never driven a Ranger but Ford sell a lot of them......so many in fact they were the 2021 market leader in 4x4's in Aus ahead of Hilux.
Speaking of toys another gripe of mine is the marketing of safety equipment on many new cars, the base models usually come with basic safety kit and you have to upgrade with a safety package($k) to get the full kit of safety equipment. Sales staff will guilt trip you into it by suggesting its important for your family to have the full kit onboard...my usual reply is are you saying the base model is unsafe?
I use the same line when buying electronics and they try and tell me to upgrade the warranty. Are you telling me it won't last x years?

Hilux had the turning circle of the titanic. Triton almost like a small car as the rear axle is so far forward by comparison....that limits what you can carry in the back though.
Ranger is somewhere in the middle - best of both worlds.

Rangers include a lot of the safety stuff in base models. You need to go sr5 or higher to even get close to the equivalent, but I don't think even the top specs have the same features as the ranger. Can't fault them really.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on September 15, 2022, 07:49:07 pm
I would agree on the Hilux, we had them at my old employer and they were reliable workhorses but they dont drive that great in terms of steering or performance and we switched to Tritons based on overall purchase/ownership cost and they were a lot nicer drive and didnt have so much the truck handling of the Toyota.
Never driven a Ranger but Ford sell a lot of them......so many in fact they were the 2021 market leader in 4x4's in Aus ahead of Hilux.
Speaking of toys another gripe of mine is the marketing of safety equipment on many new cars, the base models usually come with basic safety kit and you have to upgrade with a safety package($k) to get the full kit of safety equipment. Sales staff will guilt trip you into it by suggesting its important for your family to have the full kit onboard...my usual reply is are you saying the base model is unsafe?
A mate of mine is an engineer at Toyota, one of their big clients is Santos. He reckons you could walk on the their sites and use the c word at them and no one would bat an eyelid. You use the words Ford Ranger and you will be booted off site. They wouldn't have them for free, apparently they reckon then shake themselves to bits in the rough t country.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 15, 2022, 09:45:31 pm
A mate of mine is an engineer at Toyota, one of their big clients is Santos. He reckons you could walk on the their sites and use the c word at them and no one would bat an eyelid. You use the words Ford Ranger and you will be booted off site. They wouldn't have them for free, apparently they reckon then shake themselves to bits in the rough t country.
Never driven one as I said so I have no idea on their pros or cons but they must be doing something right to be selling so many.
My experience with Hilux wasnt bad, they were reliable but like a lot of Toyotas you wouldnt be buying them for the driving pleasure or performance, maybe thats why they make Lexus.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on September 16, 2022, 07:05:29 am
Never driven one as I said so I have no idea on their pros or cons but they must be doing something right to be selling so many.
My experience with Hilux wasnt bad, they were reliable but like a lot of Toyotas you wouldnt be buying them for the driving pleasure or performance, maybe thats why they make Lexus.


Having driven a few Rangers, my only criticism is the positioning the the A-Pillar, for me its very annoying and a bit of a blind spot. I have mates who have them and they have had expensive injector problems. Another mate of mine is an engineer at Ford and he has worked not the Ranger project for years, he raves about it. He and my Toyota engineer mate have some almighty dust ups on our WhatsApp group. Thats all I can say about them.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 16, 2022, 08:00:02 am
The first one that brings out a decent hydrogen fuel cell solution with the necessary infrastructure will be the winner.

We are now pretty use to having a servo on every corner, but some of us will remember the days when many big companies had their own bowsers, most farmers still do of course, it might kick off like that for hydrogen fuel cells. Bunded tanks, onsite refuelling, etc., etc..
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on September 16, 2022, 08:41:13 am
Having driven a few Rangers, my only criticism is the positioning the the A-Pillar, for me its very annoying and a bit of a blind spot. I have mates who have them and they have had expensive injector problems. Another mate of mine is an engineer at Ford and he has worked not the Ranger project for years, he raves about it. He and my Toyota engineer mate have some almighty dust ups on our WhatsApp group. Thats all I can say about them.

The A pillar is the one that tends to border the windshield isnt it?  If so, this is a gripe in all modern cars for me.  It renders your view at about 2 o clock from the drivers seat obscured in a way that wasnt the case for my xe falcon.  The EF falcon was the beginning of said issue.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 16, 2022, 10:51:47 am
The A pillar is the one that tends to border the windshield isnt it?  If so, this is a gripe in all modern cars for me.  It renders your view at about 2 o clock from the drivers seat obscured in a way that wasnt the case for my xe falcon.  The EF falcon was the beginning of said issue.
True, but does stops you getting squashed like a bug in many roll over scenarios, which is often why it's even thicker in heavier vehicles and off-road types.

So there is that to consider.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on September 16, 2022, 12:44:05 pm
Its the angle they are on these days.  They tend to run 45 degrees from bonnet to roof obscuring a lot more of your view these days, and the roof to bonnet was a bit higher.

Now they are a bit more sleek for it (and I have to say look much more appealing) but have unfortunately obscured the view. 

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 16, 2022, 03:26:17 pm
The A pillar is the one that tends to border the windshield isnt it?  If so, this is a gripe in all modern cars for me.  It renders your view at about 2 o clock from the drivers seat obscured in a way that wasnt the case for my xe falcon.  The EF falcon was the beginning of said issue.
MrsE had a TS Astra, worst car we have bought and it also had the big chunky Pillar problem which obscured your view but that was the least of its problems.
Had the brakes replaced three times under warranty although Holden fought me the last time because we had Michelin tyres put on the car and removed their rubbish Goodyears,  and then the auto transmission planetary gear set failed just out of warranty and fecked the entire transmission sending metal through it. 3k later and consumer law complaints they still wouldnt come to the party so I had to get it independently repaired which was a full strip down a new gear set, torque converter and pump assy.
The dealer was going to get a transmission sent over from europe which was going to cost me 5k...couldnt wait to sell it once it was fixed and say goodbye to GM cars for good.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on September 16, 2022, 04:10:18 pm
Now they are a bit more sleek for it (and I have to say look much more appealing) but have unfortunately obscured the view.
True, they can fix that problem but most people wouldn't want to pay the ultimate price.

It reminds me of those Olympic cyclists that had the bike disintegrate under them. The technology to make such bike parts properly was invented here in Melbourne, but the process that was used for the Olympic bikes was a cheapened down version of it, more like a big home 3D printer instead of the industrial scale gadgets we worked with at the time, systems that are used in medicine to 3D print replacement hips, knees or skulls and the like.

Ultimately the Olympic failure was all about price, there is expensive, then there is bet your life on it expensive. In hindsight there must be incredible regret, what price do you put on burning a once in a lifetime opportunity?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on September 16, 2022, 06:13:16 pm
MrsE had a TS Astra, worst car we have bought and it also had the big chunky Pillar problem which obscured your view but that was the least of its problems.
Had the brakes replaced three times under warranty although Holden fought me the last time because we had Michelin tyres put on the car and removed their rubbish Goodyears,  and then the auto transmission planetary gear set failed just out of warranty and fecked the entire transmission sending metal through it. 3k later and consumer law complaints they still wouldnt come to the party so I had to get it independently repaired which was a full strip down a new gear set, torque converter and pump assy.
The dealer was going to get a transmission sent over from europe which was going to cost me 5k...couldnt wait to sell it once it was fixed and say goodbye to GM cars for good.
Isnt it funny how different people have different experiences. My mum has a 2000 Astra, my daughters both had 2002 ones as their first car. Three in our family, absolutely bullet proof was our experience. Normal fuel costs and services. I think mums had a coil pack issue which our mechanic fixed on the cheap (Holden wanted $1500, he did for $200-300). The thing is still going. My daughters have moved theirs on, drove them for 4-5 years and got the same money we paid them. I thought they were very solid and fun cars to drive, very heavy for their size but zippy. Didn't notice the A pillar on them TBH.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on September 16, 2022, 06:45:27 pm
Isnt it funny how different people have different experiences. My mum has a 2000 Astra, my daughters both had 2002 ones as their first car. Three in our family, absolutely bullet proof was our experience. Normal fuel costs and services. I think mums had a coil pack issue which our mechanic fixed on the cheap (Holden wanted $1500, he did for $200-300). The thing is still going. My daughters have moved theirs on, drove them for 4-5 years and got the same money we paid them. I thought they were very solid and fun cars to drive, very heavy for their size but zippy. Didn't notice the A pillar on them TBH.
When it was running it was a nice car and zippy as you say, ours was Black with tinted windows and looked an evil little beast when it was on the road. Air Con worked a treat too and froze your jewels off but apart from that it was a piece of junk IMO and when we sold it for a better than expected price I felt guilty handing over the keys. Its had low ks because it was always at the dealers which probably helped the resale value......the pillar issue wasnt helped by MrsE only being a little lady at 5'2 and struggling to see over the dashboard much less past the pillars, think the rear windscreen also bothered her too being rather small.


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Professer E on September 17, 2022, 07:57:16 am
All later model GMs had serious issues, do some digging on C(r)aptivas....

Caveat emptor on MGs.

I also went from Toyotas to a Ranger.  Theyre so much more confortable and easier to manage but I'd be happier to chuck hay bales in the old Hilux.  Though I'd hate to drive that in traffic.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on September 17, 2022, 08:21:06 am
I also went from Toyotas to a Ranger.  Theyre so much more confortable and easier to manage but I'd be happier to chuck hay bales in the old Hilux.  Though I'd hate to drive that in traffic.
Thats the key, if you are out bush, or on a farm, then you go the hilux. You won't need all the bells and whistles that the ranger has and the ultra reliability is a premium.

If you are doing any decent driving on suburban roads or highways, go the ranger. More comfortable, easier to drive, can still go bush and do some hard work when you want it too.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 07, 2022, 02:05:39 pm
You just have to love the brazen nature of modern media.

For years they have been telling us climate change is fake, giving unqualified sceptics equal time and space with trained experts all in the name of 'fairness'!

Now today, having constantly denied the effects of climate change, The Hun and Sky News types are running with story lines that claim extreme weather is about to be the next global catastrophe!

So my The Hun take away, Climate Change is fake while Extreme Weather is Real, but caused by what?

I suspect mostly a load of Murdoch hot air! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 07, 2022, 02:56:29 pm
You just have to love the brazen nature of modern media.

For years they have been telling us climate change is fake, giving unqualified sceptics equal time and space with trained experts all in the name of 'fairness'!

Now today, having constantly denied the effects of climate change, The Hun and Sky News types are running with story lines that claim extreme weather is about to be the next global catastrophe!

So my The Hun take away, Climate Change is fake while Extreme Weather is Real, but caused by what?

I suspect mostly a load of Murdoch hot air! ::)

Is it possible that extreme weather events were on the way regardless of what happens with the glob?  Scientific programs have shown that large amounts of volcanic activity have contributed to the cooling of the globe and previous ice ages.  After watching such programs its possible that these events would happen anyway isn't it?

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 07, 2022, 10:06:57 pm
Is it possible that extreme weather events were on the way regardless of what happens with the glob?  Scientific programs have shown that large amounts of volcanic activity have contributed to the cooling of the globe and previous ice ages.  After watching such programs its possible that these events would happen anyway isn't it?

No. 

The extreme weather events that we have been experiencing since the last decades of the 20th century are the result of climate change brought about by human activity.  That's why many earth scientists favour the use of the Anthropocene to denote the current  geological epoch that's defined by significant human impact on Earth's geology and ecosystems.  That includes, but is not limited to, anthropogenic climate change.

There might be the odd earth scientist that denies the reality of climate change but the overwhelming majority accept that anthropogenic climate change is real and we've probably waited too long before trying to redress the problem.  Those that come after us won't thank us, if they manage to survive.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 08, 2022, 07:29:44 am
Is it possible that extreme weather events were on the way regardless of what happens with the glob?  Scientific programs have shown that large amounts of volcanic activity have contributed to the cooling of the globe and previous ice ages.  After watching such programs its possible that these events would happen anyway isn't it?


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 02:49:22 am
It won't go unnoticed by many of you, but make sure you make note of the rock spider like silence from the likes of Panahi and Bolt regarding the floods and global warming!

Extreme weather events becoming more severe and frequent is exactly what scientists have been warning about for two decades.

It's usual for Bolt to claim rain is evidence global warming is bogus, but the creep has slithered under a rock!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 16, 2022, 09:20:45 am
Greta Thunberg who always has plenty to criticize but offers little in the way of solutions has decided that nuclear is a better way to go than burning coal .
Vlad with his dictator ways has made energy a priority fix in Europe and with gas reserves only good for a year it appears rather than burn fossil fuels Greta has decided she would rather have her greeny cabin in the woods lit and warmed via a bit of uranium much to the shock of her supporters.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 16, 2022, 10:10:14 am
Greta Thunberg who always has plenty to criticize but offers little in the way of solutions has decided that nuclear is a better way to go than burning coal .
Vlad with his dictator ways has made energy a priority fix in Europe and with gas reserves only good for a year it appears rather than burn fossil fuels Greta has decided she would rather have her greeny cabin in the woods lit and warmed via a bit of uranium much to the shock of her supporters.

the numbers make sense.  Whilst its the worst pollutant of any energy source its pollution to energy generated is unmatched.

Its cheaper, its more efficient, and now to do some real science on how we might be able to use or reuse any waste.  I suspect that this is where our technology future lies rightly or wrongly.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 10:29:59 am
The nuclear power fear mongering is promoted more by the Solar PV industry than coal or oil.

The truth is Solar POV is not as clean as people think, even people in the game admit that there are warehouses full of old / defective panels they have no idea how to recycle or process, and may never. Also making them is horrendously damaging for the planet, they aren't just sand based glass, they are full of rare heavy metals and other exotic chemistry.

A rapid solution is the best option, and in terms of developing capacity and then genuinely reducing emissions modern nuclear is so far ahead of the alternatives it's almost a joke to suggest anything else.

Fearmongers point to Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Japan, but these are 1950s technology built in the 1960s, and 1960s tech built in the 70s.

Finally, opponents like to refer to Japan as a nuclear disaster, but so far it's nuclear fallout has hardly struck a blow, let's not forget Japan was a tsunami that killed nearly 20,000 people, but politically motivated it was renamed as the Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami so the anti-nuclear brigade could focus on Japan. Tohoku by the way is not inaccurate, but deliberately renaming the event was a deliberate choice not an accident. (Even the activists in IT also ensure Fu4ush1ma is renamed screwushima to paint it a certain way!)

Nothing online happens by accident, it's all the result of deliberate human actions, and the protagonists aren't all altruistic or innocent.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 16, 2022, 10:30:57 am
the numbers make sense.  Whilst its the worst pollutant of any energy source its pollution to energy generated is unmatched.

Its cheaper, its more efficient, and now to do some real science on how we might be able to use or reuse any waste.  I suspect that this is where our technology future lies rightly or wrongly.

Nuclear power plants are way more expensive than alternatives and require very long lead times.  We’ve missed the boat on conventional nuclear power by several decades.

I recently watched a fascinating documentary on one of Scotland’s nuclear power plants.  Apart from the technology and environmental requirements, the youth of the highly qualified technicians was surprising.

Part of the conversation was about the inevitable de-commissioning of the power station.  The head honcho explained that no more power stations using that nuclear technology would be built in the UK.  It wasn’t clear what would replace them; perhaps smaller plants.

I also saw a documentary that briefly looked at the last “coal-fired” power station in the UK.  It burns sustainably harvested timber by-products 🤔
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 10:54:32 am
Nuclear power plants are way more expensive than alternatives and require very long lead times.  We’ve missed the boat on conventional nuclear power by several decades.
Compared to, when you add the decommission / disposal cost of Solar PV because it's cannot be recycled, the huge land area it must cover and the growing value of that land, and accept that the Solar VPO waste contains rare earths heavy metals and other toxic chemicals, ignoring the 10, 20 or 30 life time spin which is mostly false. the differential cost per kWh isn't that much different.

Even the new biodegradable / recyclable printed Solar PV that I've worked on with CSIRO is about 1/10th the energy density, meaning even though it's very cheap per square meter to make it needs about 20x - 30x the surface area coverage to make the same energy, and it won't last 10 years! The Solar car travelling around Australia at the moment to demonstrate the printable solar PV technology needs to roll out a strip about 1.2m wide x 400m long just to recharge is a sensible timeframe (4 - 8hrs)!

The long term plan is to cover every available surface with the stuff, roofing, driveways footpaths even roads. But given it doesn't last forever so you will need massive facilities just to deal with and recycle the decaying product. To replace conventional power, a city like Melbourne would be dealing with 1,000,000,000m² of waste annually after the first 10 years, as much polymer material as 11 very large industrial factories can pump out a year! This is "The Greenest" solution renewables have to offer! :o

By the way, how do you mount this new technology film? Using double sided tape, doubles the cost, doubles the waste, if the tape can last ten years good luck getting that off a surface and ready to be re-applied, maybe we can just plaster a new layer over the top! ;) You know how we got the old test films off, grit blasting / pressure washing, polymers lost down the drain, not a gram recycled.

It's great technology, but the devil is in the detail, and the sales pitch is a con design to attract short term investment and government funding.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 16, 2022, 11:38:37 am
https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/nuclear-energy-too-expensive-to-replace-fossil-fuels-20220711-p5b0pd
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 12:25:40 pm
https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/nuclear-energy-too-expensive-to-replace-fossil-fuels-20220711-p5b0pd
Many of the sources and ideas Ludlow quotes / promotes have come from vested interests, including CSIRO, entitles that are making a living off grants for advanced manufacturing R&D including renewables. For example, there is a CSIRO site right here in Melbourne that houses Printable Solar PV R&D, Advanced Manufacturing, Hydrogen Economies and Carbon Capture and Sequestration, almost under the one roof! You can walk 100m and get a diametrically opposed opinion, which one you or the media choose is arbitrary.* In many many cases they compete for the same grant money!

I worked in / with the same industry for over a decade, they lost me when after years working on low CO2 alternatives they started kyboshing pretty anything that competed for grant money, no matter how effective, viable or achievable it might be, the green energy industry is not as altruistic as many think.

*The truth is there is no one best, cheapest, greenest solution, and the field of renewable energy is as full of profiteers as any other including oil, coal, gas, nuclear, etc., etc.. Claiming one is better than the other is a bit like preferring a Gulag over a Stalag.

The fastest solution is a broad mix of all technologies, technologies that are based on actual immediately achievable and attainable results/actions and not promises at the end of a rainbow. The rainbow stuff has it's place, but it's not going to happen in the timeframe needed.

At the moment, the funding models lead to paralysis by indecision, they debate and debate and debate, too gutless to make a choice, it's like a punters lament scared to lose a bet, but it's not black and white like the media make out, the black and white opinions are a subjective choice not an objective analysis. They should be pushing forward on every available avenue and chipping away at the problem as much as possible on all fronts, it's not the all in winner takes all option that commerce wants!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 16, 2022, 12:58:07 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower-idUSKBN1W909J

https://thebulletin.org/2019/06/why-nuclear-power-plants-cost-so-much-and-what-can-be-done-about-it/

And a counter view:

https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2022/nuclear-wasted-why-the-cost-of-nuclear-energy-is-misunderstood
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 16, 2022, 02:18:47 pm
Many of the sources and ideas Ludlow quotes / promotes have come from vested interests, including CSIRO, entitles that are making a living off grants for advanced manufacturing R&D including renewables. For example, there is a CSIRO site right here in Melbourne that houses Printable Solar PV R&D, Advanced Manufacturing, Hydrogen Economies and Carbon Capture and Sequestration, almost under the one roof! You can walk 100m and get a diametrically opposed opinion, which one you or the media choose is arbitrary.* In many many cases they compete for the same grant money!

I worked in / with the same industry for over a decade, they lost me when after years working on low CO2 alternatives they started kyboshing pretty anything that competed for grant money, no matter how effective, viable or achievable it might be, the green energy industry is not as altruistic as many think.

*The truth is there is no one best, cheapest, greenest solution, and the field of renewable energy is as full of profiteers as any other including oil, coal, gas, nuclear, etc., etc.. Claiming one is better than the other is a bit like preferring a Gulag over a Stalag.

The fastest solution is a broad mix of all technologies, technologies that are based on actual immediately achievable and attainable results/actions and not promises at the end of a rainbow. The rainbow stuff has it's place, but it's not going to happen in the timeframe needed.

At the moment, the funding models lead to paralysis by indecision, they debate and debate and debate, too gutless to make a choice, it's like a punters lament scared to lose a bet, but it's not black and white like the media make out, the black and white opinions are a subjective choice not an objective analysis. They should be pushing forward on every available avenue and chipping away at the problem as much as possible on all fronts, it's not the all in winner takes all option that commerce wants!
Most of the electrical overhead equipment and transmission lines are a antiquated hybrid mess.
I used to be involved in the project maintenance of this equipment and there were never enough resources to fix it properly and we were always bandaiding solutions. It's needs a rebuild to service a nuclear grid and the only way that will happen is with overseas private investment with people like Cannon Brookes and the Chinese stumping up the money and building the reactors.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 04:09:02 pm
Most of the electrical overhead equipment and transmission lines are a antiquated hybrid mess.
I used to be involved in the project maintenance of this equipment and there were never enough resources to fix it properly and we were always bandaiding solutions. It's needs a rebuild to service a nuclear grid and the only way that will happen is with overseas private investment with people like Cannon Brookes and the Chinese stumping up the money and building the reactors.
Very true, and this argument is universal, whether your power comes from large Solar PV farms with commercial grade 24x7 battery storage, coal, gas, wind or nuclear.

Extremists claim micro-grids are the solution, but they are still grids that somebody has to own, operate and maintain.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 04:12:56 pm
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower-idUSKBN1W909J

https://thebulletin.org/2019/06/why-nuclear-power-plants-cost-so-much-and-what-can-be-done-about-it/

And a counter view:

https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2022/nuclear-wasted-why-the-cost-of-nuclear-energy-is-misunderstood
This highlights the very problem I'm discussing, the analysis of energy sources is completely subjective, and the outcome of any report is based on arbitrary selection of the metrics used in reporting.

The more inclusive you make the measures, the less difference there really is in terms of cost and environmental impact. For example, just because Solar PV doesn't make a mess in your own backyard, at least not at first until you have to dispose of redundant panels, doesn't mean it is not filthy and harmful on a global scale. The atmosphere is a closed system, just like fresh air the filth doesn't stop at the customs and quarantine border, it's not stopped by border control!

What is more, the total risk profiles over a long period are quite similar, just each has it's own strengths and weaknesses, in other words differences.

Even the A-Grade standard for future clean energy, fusion, has it's risks and issues when fully accounted for, there is no solution that offers a free lunch.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 04:21:15 pm
There is some significant irony in people arguing against nuclear because of the issues of dealing with hazardous waste, only to claim batteries are a solution to 24x7 power from Solar PV and Wind!   ------------ Don't mention the war!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 04:37:43 pm
The current cleanest Solar PV technology is printable solar, but it's energy performance is poor relative to silicon or perovskite alternatives, you need one or two orders of magnitude more panels by area to deliver the same energy. Let's be clear, that is 10x to 100x the area for energy equivalence.

Silicon, perovskite and telluride based panels are all constructed using rather nasty trace elements. lead, arsenic, cadmium, cyanide, and processing the waste from silicon or perovskite panels is banned in some locations for the same reasons that workers have to be protected form silicate dusts in the mining or construction industries. The old panels are classified as a toxic waste.

Even printable solar is a problem, they are trying to massively improve the efficiency by, ............. adding perovskites loaded with lead compounds! This stuff can have more lead in it than is actually legal in some locations to sell as paint, if you sold paint with it in it you would be charged, fined and possibly jailed by the environmental protection agencies in some regions! They proponents argue that it is safe because it's a solid, but so was the stuff that now slowly leeches poison out of landfills.

Batteries are even worse!

Until the various industry segments own up to all these issues, in other words act honestly, we aren't really making progress we are just shifting the problems around in time and location.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Lods on October 16, 2022, 04:38:31 pm
There is some significant irony in people arguing against nuclear because of the issues of dealing with hazardous waste, only to claim batteries are a solution to 24x7 power from Solar PV and Wind!   ------------ Don't mention the war!

...and it may be the only 'climate change' we need to worry about is the Nuclear Winter. :(
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 16, 2022, 04:54:31 pm
...and it may be the only 'climate change' we need to worry about is the Nuclear Winter. :(
@Lods don't get me wrong, I want these solutions to work, I still work in the advanced manufacturing industry, as much as I want it to work I can see the folly of choosing solutions built on false claims.

For example, at the moment I'm working on membrane technologies, not the membranes themselves but how to make holes in them. We can use lasers to drills tiny geometrically spaced holes in special membranes. Nanometre sized holes space just microns apart. But to be commercially useful you need ways to make this stuff by the square kilometre, at the moment the fastest we can go is about 2.5 Million holes per second, and that sounds like quite a lot. But when you are talking about nanometre sized holes spaced micrometres apart it's only at best a few square millimetres per second! That's at least two or three orders of magnitude away from being useful for industry. Yet there are people out there now selling this technology to politicians as the solution to energy storage or generation.

I did the sums the other day, if I can go at 2.5M x 50nm holes per second, at 1um spacing, that is 111hrs to make a 1m² sheet. I can add some more lasers, let's say 1m² / hr is needed so just use 111 lasers. The laser I use is worth US$1.3M a piece!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 16, 2022, 06:53:15 pm
Nuclear power plants are way more expensive than alternatives and require very long lead times.  We’ve missed the boat on conventional nuclear power by several decades.

I recently watched a fascinating documentary on one of Scotland’s nuclear power plants.  Apart from the technology and environmental requirements, the youth of the highly qualified technicians was surprising.

Part of the conversation was about the inevitable de-commissioning of the power station.  The head honcho explained that no more power stations using that nuclear technology would be built in the UK.  It wasn’t clear what would replace them; perhaps smaller plants.

I also saw a documentary that briefly looked at the last “coal-fired” power station in the UK.  It burns sustainably harvested timber by-products 🤔

Way more expensive to set up, but once running they are bang for buck in terms of gigawatt procured vs uranium required vs waste created.

I chose the word efficient for a reason.  Watching Australia roll out solar technology over the last 20 years doesn't make me say that its quick to produce nor cheap, and I don't see us having an abundance of redundant energy that we are storing (quite the opposite seems to occur frequently).  People seem hung up on the waste component of this.  Things aren't static.  The waste isn't what it used to be, and im sure that there are technology advancements that could be done to reduce the waste further by recycling it somehow.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on October 16, 2022, 07:43:23 pm
For those old enough to remember....which on this site, is probably everybody, think back to the old VHS vs Beta days for video tapes.

A battle of technologies that ultimately did the same thing, albeit to differing degrees.

In the end, VHS won out.
In reality, Beta was the far superior product.

VHS had better marketing, so despite being inferior, won over the public.

BETA is Nuclear.

Re-educate the public and get a better marketing strategy that can cut through the alternative spin-doctoring and mud slinging of the alternatives.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 16, 2022, 11:39:17 pm
Way more expensive to set up, but once running they are bang for buck in terms of gigawatt procured vs uranium required vs waste created.

I chose the word efficient for a reason.  Watching Australia roll out solar technology over the last 20 years doesn't make me say that its quick to produce nor cheap, and I don't see us having an abundance of redundant energy that we are storing (quite the opposite seems to occur frequently).  People seem hung up on the waste component of this.  Things aren't static.  The waste isn't what it used to be, and im sure that there are technology advancements that could be done to reduce the waste further by recycling it somehow.

The economic analyses are unequivocal, nuclear power generation is now too expensive.  That’s why the private sector won’t invest in nuclear power and is cutting its losses by cancelling power stations under construction.

There may be issues with the economic analyses but the corporate bean counters are convinced.  The only new nuclear power plants will be underwritten by governments.  As EB pointed out, most governments will struggle to find the funds, or private sector partners, to get the power distribution networks up to scratch.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 17, 2022, 04:23:41 am
The economic analyses are unequivocal, nuclear power generation is now too expensive.  That’s why the private sector won’t invest in nuclear power and is cutting its losses by cancelling power stations under construction.

There may be issues with the economic analyses but the corporate bean counters are convinced.  The only new nuclear power plants will be underwritten by governments.  As EB pointed out, most governments will struggle to find the funds, or private sector partners, to get the power distribution networks up to scratch.
the same applies to renewables about the grid and storage of energy. 

Its still moving forward.

  Im not arguing right vs wrong here, I'm saying the bean counters don't always measure things with saving the most amount beans, rather they count beans with politics involved, and will waste more beans for many reasons not to do with being efficient with the beans.

We all know that a nuclear power plant is unwanted on anyone's doorstep and thats the main blocker behind any of them being built and consequently a political loser which is the main blocker behind them being built.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on October 17, 2022, 07:30:12 am
the same applies to renewables about the grid and storage of energy. 

Its still moving forward.

  Im not arguing right vs wrong here, I'm saying the bean counters don't always measure things with saving the most amount beans, rather they count beans with politics involved, and will waste more beans for many reasons not to do with being efficient with the beans.

We all know that a nuclear power plant is unwanted on anyone's doorstep and thats the main blocker behind any of them being built and consequently a political lover which is the main blocker behind them being built.
Aka 'marketing'
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 17, 2022, 08:07:43 am
The waste isn't what it used to be, and im sure that there are technology advancements that could be done to reduce the waste further by recycling it somehow.
That's the folly, it's the same folly for most human technologies, phones, batteries, plastic bags, paper, cars, tyres, and now Solar PV panels.

Paper and plastic are way easier to recycle and re-use than any of the other alternatives like Solar PV panels or batteries, and we have paper and plastic piling up in repositories all over each and every major city, even warehouses full of the stuff to keep it dry so it won't spontaneously ignite, or else the eventually bury it after residents have diligently sorted the recycling into clean piles and / or been fined for throwing it in the wrong bins! Do you know the biggest potential use for the bulk of it, they are planning to combust it in specially designed furnaces to make energy!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 17, 2022, 12:28:18 pm
Right on queue Germany is showing us the folly of premature shutdown of it's power stations, people are about to freeze over winter and even the greens are declaring a halt to the shutdown process.

The irony is, Germany imports most of it's reserve power now from France, and you know what generates it, nuclear! ;)

Some will make this another pro / anti nuclear type debate, but it really is highlighting the stupidity of forming government energy management policy by social media. The replacement technologies just aren't there and reliable yet, a delay just to next April means squat, viability is years away!

Imagine if Echuca, Rochester, Kerang, etc., etc., had a dependency on ground plane solar PV, or the batteries went under. That's not going to be power back on when it things dry out, in weeks or months later! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 17, 2022, 01:32:02 pm
Bit like buying a EV vehicle, high initial expense and you need to drive a certain number of K's to break even and then you start saving money.
You need all States working together and a network of reactors which deliver no more than 10% of the total output each for safety and maintenance.
It's the initial outlay, selling the cost/reward and setting up a controlling administration with the usual politics involved which are the barriers to entry for Australia.
The technology is there but it's pushing the go button in people's minds that is the hard bit...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: blueday on October 17, 2022, 04:43:00 pm
More to come on this topics, repair and maintenance of battery driven vehicles has a long way to go..

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/12/30/tesla-exploded-dynamite-repair-costs-22k-moos-pkg-vpx.cnn 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 17, 2022, 05:16:19 pm
Bit like buying a EV vehicle, high initial expense and you need to drive a certain number of K's to break even and then you start saving money.
You need all States working together and a network of reactors which deliver no more than 10% of the total output each for safety and maintenance.
It's the initial outlay, selling the cost/reward and setting up a controlling administration with the usual politics involved which are the barriers to entry for Australia.
The technology is there but it's pushing the go button in people's minds that is the hard bit...

Wouldnt have an EV vehicle if you gave it to me for nicks EB.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 17, 2022, 05:48:49 pm
Wouldnt have an EV vehicle if you gave it to me for nicks EB.
Im 50/50 GTC...my brain says the next car we buy has to be some form of EV either Hybrid, PHEV or Full electric but when you sit down and do the maths, pros and cons its hard to justify the expense. You look at the resale value on a EV with old batteries for example and it isnt going to be great and we just dont do the Km's anymore.
Also do you want to be stuck with a combustion only vehicle in 5-7 years time when Governments are going to be insisting you go some form of EV and making life harder for non EV cars/owners.
Long gone are the days when you keep a car for ten plus years like you and I might have done in the past...with tech changing/safety equipment getting more advanced etc you feel more inclined to upgrade to keep your family safer and thats how cunning car makers market and make their cars now...what to do?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 17, 2022, 05:59:54 pm
Im 50/50 GTC...my brain says the next car we buy has to be some form of EV either Hybrid, PHEV or Full electric but when you sit down and do the maths, pros and cons its hard to justify the expense. You look at the resale value on a EV with old batteries for example and it isnt going to be great and we just dont do the Km's anymore.
Also do you want to be stuck with a combustion only vehicle in 5-7 years time when Governments are going to be insisting you go some form of EV and making life harder for non EV cars/owners.
Long gone are the days when you keep a car for ten plus years like you and I might have done in the past...with tech changing/safety equipment getting more advanced etc you feel more inclined to upgrade to keep your family safer and thats how cunning car makers market and make their cars now...what to do?
EVs won't cut it for what I need EOS. They can't take away what I need.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 17, 2022, 08:07:21 pm
the same applies to renewables about the grid and storage of energy. 

Its still moving forward.

  Im not arguing right vs wrong here, I'm saying the bean counters don't always measure things with saving the most amount beans, rather they count beans with politics involved, and will waste more beans for many reasons not to do with being efficient with the beans.

We all know that a nuclear power plant is unwanted on anyone's doorstep and thats the main blocker behind any of them being built and consequently a political loser which is the main blocker behind them being built.

Leaving Australia aside with its ban on nuclear power, it's economics that is stopping investment in nuclear power.  The 2019 World Nuclear Industry Status report gives the following energy production costs:
>Solar power ranges from $36 in to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh);
>Onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh; and
>Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189.

On top of that, since 2009 the average construction time for reactors worldwide was just under 10 years, and that's well above the  World Nuclear Association's estimate of between 5 and 8.5 years.  That's a major drawback when stabilising the climate is urgent.

 Apart from the slowness of nuclear power station builds, it no longer meets technical or operational needs that low-carbon options   meet much faster and with lower initial and ongoing costs.  Capital investment reflects that.  For example, in 2018, China invested $91 billion in renewables but just $6.5 billion in nuclear ... and there's no consideration of whether the population wants or doesn't want a nuclear power plant on their doorstep.

It’s worth adding that China has just decided to increase its coal-fired electricity generation capacity.  The CCP doesn’t give a fat rat’s clacker about climate change, international obligations and/or the wishes of the people.  It goes with the cheapest options and they are renewables and coal, not nuclear.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on October 17, 2022, 08:13:40 pm
I have looked at swapping my car for a new one a number of times in the past couple of years but I just don't seem to be able to make a good case, apart from the temptation of getting into a bright shiny new toy.

I don't think EVs are quite there yet and I am reluctant to invest significant funds into a new internal combustion model at this point. I don't travel long distances these days so I think I'll just keep running the old bomb for as long as it keeps going. It's still low Ks and has good service history so fingers crossed it's good for a couple of more years.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 17, 2022, 08:22:48 pm
I have looked at swapping my car for a new one a number of times in the past couple of years but I just don't seem to be able to make a good case, apart from the temptation of getting into a bright shiny new toy.

I don't think EVs are quite there yet and I am reluctant to invest significant funds into a new internal combustion model at this point. I don't travel long distances these days so I think I'll just keep running the old bomb for as long as it keeps going. It's still low Ks and has good service history so fingers crossed it's good for a couple of more years.

We find ourselves in a similar dilemma, Fluffy One.

Mrs Baggers and I have our own cars, hers is 7 years old and has done 63,000kms and mine is 11 years old and has done 112,000kms and both are purring along nicely. Mine's a 3 litre AWD turbo and hers a 2 litre turbo. We considered trading both in on a one new car... but... hybrid? Internal combustion? EV? I think we're going to wait another 12 months... but the temptation to get a shiny new toy, as you say, is so very tempting!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Macca37 on October 17, 2022, 11:39:16 pm
I have looked at swapping my car for a new one a number of times in the past couple of years but I just don't seem to be able to make a good case, apart from the temptation of getting into a bright shiny new toy.

I don't think EVs are quite there yet and I am reluctant to invest significant funds into a new internal combustion model at this point. I don't travel long distances these days so I think I'll just keep running the old bomb for as long as it keeps going. It's still low Ks and has good service history so fingers crossed it's good for a couple of more years.

I made the decision to buy a new ICE vehicle last year and took delivery in November - a 2 litre turbo.

No doubt owning an EV would give me a feeling of keeping up to date with technology but I see far too many problems with every day motoring.

Just to mention a few:  how long will it be before the infrastructure is in place which will enable  millions of cars to be re-charged at home at night, and how will it be financed?  What will be the infrastructure and its cost which will enable cars parked in units and on every suburban road in our cities to be charged every night?

Today it took me under five minutes to fill my tank, pay the attendant, and drive away.  How many thousands of charging units will be required, and at what cost, to allow motorists to charge their batteries during the day to 80 percent charge in a time remotely close to filling a petrol engine car?

The overseas experience seems to be that approximately 50 percent of charging units are out of order at any one time and can take several days to be brought online again.

I believe that by the time these problems are solved I will be too old to worry about driving.




Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 18, 2022, 07:06:33 am
I made the decision to buy a new ICE vehicle last year and took delivery in November - a 2 litre turbo.

No doubt owning an EV would give me a feeling of keeping up to date with technology but I see far too many problems with every day motoring.

Just to mention a few:  how long will it be before the infrastructure is in place which will enable  millions of cars to be re-charged at home at night, and how will it be financed?  What will be the infrastructure and its cost which will enable cars parked in units and on every suburban road in our cities to be charged every night?

Today it took me under five minutes to fill my tank, pay the attendant, and drive away.  How many thousands of charging units will be required, and at what cost, to allow motorists to charge their batteries during the day to 80 percent charge in a time remotely close to filling a petrol engine car?

The overseas experience seems to be that approximately 50 percent of charging units are out of order at any one time and can take several days to be brought online again.

I believe that by the time these problems are solved I will be too old to worry about driving.





If we think the price of the EV is high, wait till you start getting gouged for all the infrastructure you mention above.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 18, 2022, 08:16:42 am
Leaving Australia aside with its ban on nuclear power, it's economics that is stopping investment in nuclear power.  The 2019 World Nuclear Industry Status report gives the following energy production costs:
You do realize this is a false flag entity, the name is a direct contradiction to the interests of those on the panel, they masquerade as a nuclear industry panel when they are in fact an assemblage of nuclear abolitionists claiming to be impartial.

That panels behaviour is the exact thing that has turned me away from green and renewable energy, a lie is a lie no matter which direction it comes from.

They are the nuclear industry version of the Australian Vaccination Network! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 18, 2022, 12:29:56 pm
You do realize this is a false flag entity, the name is a direct contradiction to the interests of those on the panel, they masquerade as a nuclear industry panel when they are in fact an assemblage of nuclear abolitionists claiming to be impartial.

That panels behaviour is the exact thing that has turned me away from green and renewable energy, a lie is a lie no matter which direction it comes from.

They are the nuclear industry version of the Australian Vaccination Network! :o

I think you may be stretching things just a tad there LP  :)

The WNISR is up front about its opposition to nuclear power.  However, that doesn't detract from the data presented in its reports, most of which is drawn from sources such as nuclear power generator companies' annual reports, the IAEA, Nuclear Energy International magazine, the Economic Commission for Europe, the US Department of State, White House Fact Sheets, and other national governments' status reports.  The WNISR even presents a comparison of its findings with those of the IAEA so you can drill down and satisfy yourself about the reliability of conflicting data sets.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 18, 2022, 01:00:48 pm
I think you may be stretching things just a tad there LP  :)

The WNISR is up front about its opposition to nuclear power.  However, that doesn't detract from the data presented in its reports, most of which is drawn from sources such as nuclear power generator companies' annual reports, the IAEA, Nuclear Energy International magazine, the Economic Commission for Europe, the US Department of State, White House Fact Sheets, and other national governments' status reports.  The WNISR even presents a comparison of its findings with those of the IAEA so you can drill down and satisfy yourself about the reliability of conflicting data sets.
It's about the metrics used, it not about the validity of the data as most of it is probably accurate, it's just not the full picture. Both sides of the debate can include or exclude whatever they like in various reports and then claim the conclusion is definitive.

Reality is, both sides of the debate are as bad as each other.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 18, 2022, 07:18:20 pm
Using these flaky numbers to calculate costs of power generation is a bit flawed. For instance every renewable doesn't calculate based on retiring and the carbon footprint to manufacture.  Apparently you can make renewable energy with no pollutants. 

Meanwhile over at nuclear energy land how many carbon offsets need to be calculated to gather the cost of said energy?

Oh look, one is more expensive than the other.

Its a junk comparison IMHO and fails to tell the story.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on October 18, 2022, 07:41:40 pm
Using these flaky numbers to calculate costs of power generation is a bit flawed. For instance every renewable doesn't calculate based on retiring and the carbon footprint to manufacture.  Apparently you can make renewable energy with no pollutants. 

Meanwhile over at nuclear energy land how many carbon offsets need to be calculated to gather the cost of said energy?

Oh look, one is more expensive than the other.

Its a junk comparison IMHO and fails to tell the story.


Its with that kind of calculation that makes nuclear more viable in Australia.

Whatever it is you use, coal or uranium, you have to get it out of the ground.

You need less uranium by comparison to coal to get 'x' amount of gigawatts.....so less mining costs and/or damage to the environment as a result.
All that happens before you even get to burning/heating anything.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 18, 2022, 07:54:36 pm
Using these flaky numbers to calculate costs of power generation is a bit flawed. For instance every renewable doesn't calculate based on retiring and the carbon footprint to manufacture.  Apparently you can make renewable energy with no pollutants. 

Meanwhile over at nuclear energy land how many carbon offsets need to be calculated to gather the cost of said energy?

Oh look, one is more expensive than the other.

Its a junk comparison IMHO and fails to tell the story.

Whole-life cost (WLC) is just that Thry.  It includes planning cost, initial cost, operational cost, maintenance burden and eventual deconstruction and disposal costs.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 18, 2022, 09:01:02 pm
Whole-life cost (WLC) is just that Thry.  It includes planning cost, initial cost, operational cost, maintenance burden and eventual deconstruction and disposal costs.
Which is a great example, fudging the numbers by making one source operate at peak capacity far longer than it really can, and the competitor systems redundant /decommissioned long before they are done.

@DJC , I understand why you take the position that you take, I get it, and I agree whole heartedly with the goals behind green energy, renewables and low carbon, but long term the public and political debate has to be genuine or it's going to end in energy anarchy. The end result of all sides selling the public gold painted turds!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 19, 2022, 12:05:18 am
Which is a great example, fudging the numbers by making one source operate at peak capacity far longer than it really can, and the competitor systems redundant /decommissioned long before they are done.

@DJC , I understand why you take the position that you take, I get it, and I agree whole heartedly with the goals behind green energy, renewables and low carbon, but long term the public and political debate has to be genuine or it's going to end in energy anarchy. The end result of all sides selling the public gold painted turds!

The bottom line is that the decision-makers, that is, the corporates, banks, super funds, investors, economists, futurists, treasurers, heads of state, politburos, etc, have crunched the numbers and the end result is that they have decided that nuclear power is too expensive and has too great a lead time to make a meaningful difference to climate change.  There will be ongoing minor growth in funds spent on nuclear power as small modular reactors and/or molten salt reactors replace some conventional nuclear power plants but there are no signs of a major take up.  According to PwC's "The Future of Energy", it is unlikely that the global funds spent on nuclear power generation will rise above 12% of the total global power generation spend.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 19, 2022, 08:20:01 am
The bottom line is that the decision-makers, that is, the corporates, banks, super funds, investors, economists, futurists, treasurers, heads of state, politburos, etc, have crunched the numbers and the end result is that they have decided that nuclear power is too expensive and has too great a lead time to make a meaningful difference to climate change.  There will be ongoing minor growth in funds spent on nuclear power as small modular reactors and/or molten salt reactors replace some conventional nuclear power plants but there are no signs of a major take up.  According to PwC's "The Future of Energy", it is unlikely that the global funds spent on nuclear power generation will rise above 12% of the total global power generation spend.
Not at all, that's a spin on the events, they have crunched the numbers but it's political numbers not economic numbers that are the issue.

In countries like Germany and Japan the dawning economic reality of moving too fast towards renewables for low carbon energy is stalling progress, the promises aren't being meet and the risk of doing long term damage to the effort significant. Even for the green politicians it's become too much of a hot potato and targets are being curtailed. Actions speak louder than words, unless people think residents in those countries are crap at math, economic math, environmental math, social math! :o

Wind energy slows and disrupts low level weather patterns, already shown to impact global warming by slowing surface air flows resulting in additional heating, and then it generates huge amounts of hard waste that as yet has no recycling pathway. There are new 100% recyclable versions coming on stream, but currently the cost of being 100% renewable is about 3x higher with 1/2 the operating life. They have to pull the plug on the 100% recyclable stuff early because if it wears out too much you start throwing parts away! A trick of green reporting is to mix 100% recyclable figures with non-recyclable performance and lifetime.

Solar PV as much as people think it will last like a pane of glass, doesn't, it's energy density drops continuously from day one, and the rate of diminishing return depends on the harshness of the environment. Put Solar PV in the outback or a desert and it will generate heaps of energy but last 1/2 as long, and if it's remote you need infrastructure to get it to where people live, often right through the guts of the best arable land! Then like wind there is the issue of legacy hard waste, not trivial amounts but huge volumes of it, none of it able to be recycled now or in the near future. Newer cheaper but less efficient Solar PV technologies like perovskite need 10x the land area and are made using toxic elements like lead, cadmium and arsenic, they degrade over time into the water table and underlying / surrounding land cannot be used for food production. They can be made without the toxic component, but then they need 30x to 100x the land.

Hydro, Tidal and Wave have massive hard waste legacies, and dramatically alter the local environments into which they are placed. For Tidal and Wave the economics of scaling are ambiguous at best, especially when the maintenance requirements for tidal or wave grow exponentially with size.

These are some simple realities of the current state of play.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 19, 2022, 10:13:21 am
Pat Cummins has decided that Alinta energy are not green enough for him and seems to have convinced Cricket Australia to dump the Chinese Hong Kong based owned company as a sponsor.
Be interested to see how political and green he gets with his IPL team and all those rupees, of course the IPL is sponsored by those well known providers of crap cars and pollution in Tata Motors who have a large factory in Kolkata where he plays cricket for the Knightriders.
I believe the Dockers are being pressured to dump their lucrative Woodside sponsorship by ex players like Dale Kickett and others. Of course Woodside have had a bumper year and are overflowing in cash and Freo are looking at a nice rise in sponsorship money so a tad awkward for them.
Interesting times in the new Green world of Sport..


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 19, 2022, 06:07:18 pm
Speaking of batteries, I'm on my 4th device that is showing evidence of the swollen lithium battery.  Causes expansion from the inside out, degrades performance, storage and the gascan be toxic. 

Thats a phone, multiple laptops and a power bank.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 19, 2022, 08:27:28 pm
Pat Cummins has decided that Alinta energy are not green enough for him and seems to have convinced Cricket Australia to dump the Chinese Hong Kong based owned company as a sponsor.
Be interested to see how political and green he gets with his IPL team and all those rupees, of course the IPL is sponsored by those well known providers of crap cars and pollution in Tata Motors who have a large factory in Kolkata where he plays cricket for the Knightriders.
I believe the Dockers are being pressured to dump their lucrative Woodside sponsorship by ex players like Dale Kickett and others. Of course Woodside have had a bumper year and are overflowing in cash and Freo are looking at a nice rise in sponsorship money so a tad awkward for them.
Interesting times in the new Green world of Sport..



I would pull my sponsorship instantly and make them starve, especially the imbeciles at woman's netball. Fargum.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 20, 2022, 02:39:06 pm
Lydia Thorpe lol.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 20, 2022, 02:52:01 pm
Lydia Thorpe lol.
What many of the popularist politicians do borders on social gaslighting, they manipulate minority groups and whip them into a fever, often over issues that do not really exist, and usually for personal fame and benefit and very rarely for the greater good.

But they are really just copying the behaviour of the media.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 20, 2022, 02:55:25 pm
Interesting to hear that Vic Labor is effectively declaring the privatisation of energy in the state a failure, I suppose when we see the decaying infrastructure, it's very very hard to disagree!

The capitalists wanted the profitable part, mostly the power stations, and basically let the rest of the kit rot. Now it needs major overhaul, they are bailing out in the name of low carbon energy, but even the low carbon options need the basic infrastructure!

Hospitals, factories, schools, transport, hospitality, won't operate on a microgrids.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 20, 2022, 03:19:00 pm
Lydia Thorpe lol.
I guess she is the first bikie chick to become a Senator, small world with the Martin connection.
You would have to be very green in the job pardon the pun to think that connection wasnt going to surface at some stage in your career and bite you.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 20, 2022, 04:14:02 pm
I guess she is the first bikie chick to become a Senator, small world with the Martin connection.
You would have to be very green in the job pardon the pun to think that connection wasnt going to surface at some stage in your career and bite you.

It's not so much the connection but her failure to disclose it that bit her on the moom.  It's all well and good to maintain the rage, but you have to be clever about how you do it and always follow process.

Actually, after reading a little more, it seems that the Senator tried to be too clever.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 20, 2022, 04:19:14 pm
It's not too hard to predict the demise of these rock throwers, the old saying applies, live by the sword die by the sword!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 20, 2022, 04:26:32 pm
It's not so much the connection but her failure to disclose it that bit her on the moom.  It's all well and good to maintain the rage, but you have to be clever about how you do it and always follow process.

Yes, I agree.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 20, 2022, 04:53:06 pm
It's not so much the connection but her failure to disclose it that bit her on the moom.  It's all well and good to maintain the rage, but you have to be clever about how you do it and always follow process.
Reckon if she had disclosed that she might not even have been nominated....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 20, 2022, 07:00:47 pm
Lydia Thorpe lol.
A horrible person. Just proves anyone can be a polly, karma's a bitch Lydia. The Greens, like Cheats FC, the gift the gift that keeps on giving.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 22, 2022, 12:56:10 pm
Reckon if she had disclosed that she might not even have been nominated....

I’m a bit hazy on the details but didn’t her staffer dob her in at the time?  Bandt only asked for her resignation as Greens deputy senate leader after her relationship with Martin was made public.

The Greens had three Kooris on their Victorian Senate ticket and two of them are intelligent folk of great integrity.  Sadly, they had the second and third places on the ticket.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 22, 2022, 02:29:02 pm
Pat Cummins has decided that Alinta energy are not green enough for him and seems to have convinced Cricket Australia to dump the Chinese Hong Kong based owned company as a sponsor.
Be interested to see how political and green he gets with his IPL team and all those rupees, of course the IPL is sponsored by those well known providers of crap cars and pollution in Tata Motors who have a large factory in Kolkata where he plays cricket for the Knightriders.
I believe the Dockers are being pressured to dump their lucrative Woodside sponsorship by ex players like Dale Kickett and others. Of course Woodside have had a bumper year and are overflowing in cash and Freo are looking at a nice rise in sponsorship money so a tad awkward for them.
Interesting times in the new Green world of Sport..




Gina Rinehart has pulled the sponsorship of the netball after the backlash.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 22, 2022, 07:44:56 pm
Gina Rinehart has pulled the sponsorship of the netball after the backlash.
Yep 15 million is a lot of money to lose based initially on  comments from a old ignorant zillionaire from the past.
I would have worked with Hancock to change the image of the company, sponsor indigenous netballers/teams and
provide employment/study pathways etc.
No one is a winner now.....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 22, 2022, 07:47:58 pm
Gina Rinehart has pulled the sponsorship of the netball after the backlash.
The lines on the netball court use titanium oxide/dioxide coming out of Rinehart's mines, some of the pigments in the uniforms, make-up and hair dyes also are by-products of wider mining operations.

The stadium they play in is quite possibly held up by materials, steel or masonry components coming out of Rinehart mines. Many of them drove to the venue in vehicles made using alloys and elements out of Rinehart mines, including the rare earths used to power the electric vehicles.

The playing surface is polished using aluminium, zirconium or silcate oxides and carbides some of which come out of Rinehart mines.

Some of them eat food cooked on gas from Rienhart drilling rigs, others may claim they cook on induction from Solar PV, probably Solar PV partially made with Rinehart Rare Earths,

The list goes on and on and on!

The hypocrisy is palpable!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 22, 2022, 09:12:35 pm
Yep 15 million is a lot of money to lose based initially on  comments from a old ignorant zillionaire from the past.
I would have worked with Hancock to change the image of the company, sponsor indigenous netballers/teams and
provide employment/study pathways etc.
No one is a winner now.....
I would have told the player (irrespective of race, colour or creed) to GAGF'd. Perhaps that's why Im no CEO and/or NA is $15M poorer.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 09:24:10 am
Lidia Thorpe, what a piece work. I pride myself in being a fairly good judge of character and I always thought she was a despicable human being as far back as her local council days. I have been proven correct. Off you go Lidia, I'm sure there's a few OMG's that have some openings for you.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 10:17:13 am
By the way, I noticed Hancock went BANG! with a subsequent statement which hit NA and sportspeople wanting to make political statements right between the eyes.
UPDATE
This is what happens when sports people try and be smart, Gina aint playing scrabble here sunshsine.

From the HS

Indigenous netball star Donnell Wallam was reportedly left ‘distressed’ and ‘devastated’ by Hancock Prospecting’s bombshell decision to pull its proposed $15m of funding from the sport on Saturday.

Wallam was at the centre of player pushback to the proposed sponsorship from Gina Rinehart’s mining company, with reports she was uncomfortable with wearing the Hancock Prospecting logo on her uniform for her Diamonds debut against England on Wednesday night.

Watch Netball as Origin Australian Diamonds face England Roses in the England Series Wednesday 7:30 PM AEST Live & Free on Kayo Freebies. Join now and start streaming instantly >

The 28-year-old’s concerns revolve around comments made by Rinehart’s father Lang Hancock in the 1980s that sterilisation should be used to solve ‘the Aboriginal problem’.

Gina Rinehart has never made any public comments on her late father’s views.

However in the face of intense pressure, Wallam decided on Friday she would wear the logo on her uniform for her international debut.

In the end all Wallam’s deliberations and soul-searching were in vain as Hancock Prospecting withdrew its funding a day after the goal shooter made it clear she would wear the logo.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 24, 2022, 11:44:29 am
In the end all Wallam’s deliberations and soul-searching were in vain as Hancock Prospecting withdrew its funding a day after the goal shooter made it clear she would wear the logo.
@Gointocarlton Is Wallam yet another Lydia Thorpe / Greens road kill?

They are insidious politicians, whispering in ears, rally the crowds, lighting torches and loading missiles, then opening the gates before quickly disappearing into the background mist! There are more carcasses left in their wake than a WA Road Train!

When I see Thorpe in the media now, I immediately hear a modified rendition of the Barmy Army's Waugh / Warnie Bookie song!

Thorpe is a poli
She wears a two faced hat
And when she saw the public's tax
She said "I'm having that!"
She shared it out with Bandty
They went and had some beers
But when the cops saw Marty boy
She stuffed her long career!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 12:51:29 pm
@Gointocarlton Is Wallam yet another Lydia Thorpe / Greens road kill?

They are insidious politicians, whispering in ears, rally the crowds, lighting torches and loading missiles, then opening the gates before quickly disappearing into the background mist! There are more carcasses left in their wake than a WA Road Train!

When I see Thorpe in the media now, I immediately hear a modified rendition of the Barmy Army's Waugh / Warnie Bookie song!

Thorpe is a poli
She wears a two faced hat
And when she saw the public's tax
She said "I'm having that!"
She shared it out with Bandty
They went and had some beers
But when the cops saw Marty boy
She stuffed her long career!

I dont know the netball player from a bar of soap but I'll lay London to a Brick she is nothing like that parasite Thorpe. Misguided maybe, but not the piece of work Thorpe is.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 24, 2022, 12:57:04 pm
I dont know the netball player from a bar of soap but I'll lay London to a Brick she is nothing like that parasite Thorpe. Misguided maybe, but not the piece of work Thorpe is.
The kid Wallam is just a social media puppet, egged on by people who have a political barrow to push, and in the process she has inadvertently screwed over all her mates!

Just like footballers, pro-netballers do not have to be brain surgeons, the first lesson they should all be taught is to keep their mouth shut in public forums!
 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 01:06:16 pm
I'm not really a fan of dumping on someone like Wallam. We're all compromised individuals, enmeshed as we are in various exploitative structures, be they environmental, political, social, or economic. You can't really expect folks to live in a cave simply to eliminate all compromises. This seems like a variation of the False Dilemma logical fallacy.

Sportspeople who are part of a team or sport that accepts commercial sponsorship are more conspicuously compromised than most. One could argue such sports sold their soul a long time ago. That doesn't mean that such sportspeople should simply shut up and say nothing. The optics of the Wallam situation aren't great. I wish she hadn't back flipped.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 24, 2022, 02:02:59 pm
The lines on the netball court use titanium oxide/dioxide coming out of Rinehart's mines, some of the pigments in the uniforms, make-up and hair dyes also are by-products of wider mining operations.

The stadium they play in is quite possibly held up by materials, steel or masonry components coming out of Rinehart mines. Many of them drove to the venue in vehicles made using alloys and elements out of Rinehart mines, including the rare earths used to power the electric vehicles.

The playing surface is polished using aluminium, zirconium or silcate oxides and carbides some of which come out of Rinehart mines.

Some of them eat food cooked on gas from Rienhart drilling rigs, others may claim they cook on induction from Solar PV, probably Solar PV partially made with Rinehart Rare Earths,

The list goes on and on and on!

The hypocrisy is palpable!

You've missed the point completely  ::)

 Lang Hancock advocated the sterilisation of people of mixed Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal ancestry.  Despite countless opportunities, Gina Rinehart has never expressed an opinion on her father's belief.  In that context, Donnell Wallam felt uncomfortable about wearing the Hancock Prospecting logo and asked if the logo could be removed from her Diamonds kit .  Her teammates supported her but at no time raised environmental issues or climate change concerns and, in fact, expressed their support for the sponsorship deal.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 02:07:47 pm
The kid Wallam is just a social media puppet, egged on by people who have a political barrow to push, and in the process she has inadvertently screwed over all her mates!

Just like footballers, pro-netballers do not have to be brain surgeons, the first lesson they should all be taught is to keep their mouth shut in public forums!
 
Ill beg to differ that she screwed over her team mates. She asked a question about permission to not wear an emblem and they all jumped on the woke bandwagon like an angry mob with no thought or consideration whatsoever of the consequences. Wallam had decided to wear it but it was too late. This means she could have been convinced earlier if her team mates and management all sat down like adults and discussed the ramifications, instead the imbeciles decided to play Poker with a Billionaire and lost their pants. Suck crap. All power to Gina and Hanckock, more people like her need to stand up to the idiots who are totally clueless and need to be educated about what is going on in the real world.
PS I said to my kids just yesterday, I am hating the world my grandkids (if O am lucky enough to have any) and their grandkids are going to have to live in. This nonsense is an example of why.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 02:26:30 pm
Whatever else may come out of this, it shows IMO that Rinehart is an evil, vindictive cow. That $15M is chump change for her, and her bottom line would not be affected in the slightest by logo less jerseys. Just a bastard act.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 24, 2022, 02:28:34 pm
Rinehart pulled the sponsorship, isn't that what they wanted?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 24, 2022, 02:42:07 pm
Whatever else may come out of this, it shows IMO that Rinehart is an evil, vindictive cow. That $15M is chump change for her, and her bottom line would not be affected in the slightest by logo less jerseys. Just a bastard act.
Same disgraceful human wanted to sack all her workers, import migrant labour and pay them $2 an hour.
Probably happy to save the sponsorship money...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 02:47:10 pm
Same disgraceful human wanted to sack all her workers, import migrant labour and pay them $2 an hour.
Probably happy to save the sponsorship money...

I'm sure she thinks the $2 per hour is fantastically generous on her part.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 24, 2022, 02:53:15 pm
Rinehart pulled the sponsorship, isn't that what they wanted?

No.  One player didn't want to wear the Hancock logo but there was never a desire to ditch the sponsorship.  What was a show of solidarity with an Indigenous teammate was seized upon as an anti-mining, pro-environment protest, but that was never the intention.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 02:56:21 pm
Whatever else may come out of this, it shows IMO that Rinehart is an evil, vindictive cow. That $15M is chump change for her, and her bottom line would not be affected in the slightest by logo less jerseys. Just a bastard act.
For the record, the company said they were happy to provide the money and never asked for a thankyou, never demanded the logo had to be worn. Its what happened since that pissed them off. They have made a statement as such. NA are a rablle, its unacceptable to treat sponsors (which are hard enough to get) like that.
As for comments her idiot father may have made, I dont think for a minute Hancock Co. or Gina R support or condone such views today. Lets move on. Or, do we we wipe her from the face of the Earth for those comments?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 24, 2022, 03:22:36 pm
For the record, the company said they were happy to provide the money and never asked for a thankyou, never demanded the logo had to be worn. Its what happened since that pissed them off. They have made a statement as such. NA are a rablle, its unacceptable to treat sponsors (which are hard enough to get) like that.
As for comments her idiot father may have made, I dont think for a minute Hancock Co. or Gina R support or condone such views today. Lets move on. Or, do we we wipe her from the face of the Earth for those comments?

It would seem to be a simple matter for Rinehart to issue a comment rejecting her father's beliefs but she has steadfastly refused despite countless opportunities to do so.  The Diamonds fiasco gave her yet another opportunity. 

Netball Australia is a rabble.  An issue that should have been settled behind closed doors was allowed to spin out of control; no-one is a winner and netball is a loser.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 03:43:53 pm
.................................
As for comments her idiot father may have made, I dont think for a minute Hancock Co. or Gina R support or condone such views today. Lets move on. Or, do we we wipe her from the face of the Earth for those comments?

Firstly, we don't know what her opinion is. There's little in the public domain that suggests she is different from her old man.

Secondly, I see no reason why we need to invoke extreme rhetoric to make a point.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 03:56:36 pm
Firstly, we don't know what her opinion is. There's little in the public domain that suggests she is different from her old man.

Secondly, I see no reason why we need to invoke extreme rhetoric to make a point.

I assume when you say "we" you mean every and not just me? It seems to me the whole debate centers around extreme rhetoric.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 24, 2022, 04:00:46 pm
Good advice for NA would be to not crap where you eat!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 04:14:10 pm
I assume when you say "we" you mean every and not just me? It seems to me the whole debate centers around extreme rhetoric.

My personal opinion is that people on the right politically take a cue from outlets like Fox and take things to an extreme, which I'm not sure is helpful. Nobody is suggesting that Rinehart be wiped from the earth for her old man's comments. You can't change the past. I suspect Wallam would have liked some dialogue, some acknowledgment from Rinehart about those comments, some give. Instead she got donuts.

IMO this was always going to be messy. As I stated earlier, sports are already in too deep, and the separation that needs to exist to allow Wallam's position to be effective and not suffer blowback no longer exists.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 04:30:38 pm
My personal opinion is that people on the right politically take a cue from outlets like Fox and take things to an extreme, which I'm not sure is helpful. Nobody is suggesting that Rinehart be wiped from the earth for her old man's comments. You can't change the past. I suspect Wallam would have liked some dialogue, some acknowledgment from Rinehart about those comments, some give. Instead she got donuts.

IMO this was always going to be messy. As I stated earlier, sports are already in too deep, and the separation that needs to exist to allow Wallam's position to be effective and not suffer blowback no longer exists.
Paul the players went rogue, NA did SFA, here we are. Its poor leadership from NA that has caused this. I'm certain Wallam would have been given all the info she needed had proper professional courtesy had been followed. Its nothing to do with left, right, up down, its just common sense.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 04:41:09 pm
Paul the players went rogue, NA did SFA, here we are. Its poor leadership from NA that has caused this. I'm certain Wallam would have been given all the info she needed had proper professional courtesy had been followed. Its nothing to do with left, right, up down, its just common sense.

It does seem like amateur hour at NA, but I still think it's poor from Rinehart to simply leave them stranded like that. She could've and should've focussed on the higher ideal of doing what's best for Netball, the future of the sport etc. Instead.............
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on October 24, 2022, 04:43:45 pm
As for comments her idiot father may have made, I dont think for a minute Hancock Co. or Gina R support or condone such views today. Lets move on. Or, do we we wipe her from the face of the Earth for those comments?

You're not one for nuance are you GTC ?
"Hes my dad and I loved him to bits, but he was a product of different times" and IF pressed "No, i don't agree with that statement"
It's really not that hard is it ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 05:17:27 pm
It does seem like amateur hour at NA, but I still think it's poor from Rinehart to simply leave them stranded like that. She could've and should've focussed on the higher ideal of doing what's best for Netball, the future of the sport etc. Instead.............
The only way to "unstupid" stupid people (like NA) is to "hit" them where it hurts. Nuffs enough. They won't make the mistake again, trust me.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 05:19:16 pm
You're not one for nuance are you GTC ?
"Hes my dad and I loved him to bits, but he was a product of different times" and IF pressed "No, i don't agree with that statement"
It's really not that hard is it ?

I have lost all patience.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 24, 2022, 05:36:59 pm
It does seem like amateur hour at NA, but I still think it's poor from Rinehart to simply leave them stranded like that. She could've and should've focussed on the higher ideal of doing what's best for Netball, the future of the sport etc. Instead.............

She has given them 4 months notice, more than what I would have given them.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Lods on October 24, 2022, 05:37:30 pm
I find this a rather strange situation...for no other reason than I can see a validity and reason for both sides actions. ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 24, 2022, 06:07:09 pm
I reckon Gina could have invited Ms Wallam for a cup of tea and a tim tam and showed her what Hancocks was about and that
it was nothing like the company founded by her old man many moons ago and had a different look on the community based on modern values.
All this saga would have been avoided and both company, player and NA could be winners but as usual humans prefer to pick sides and go to war early without thinking it through. Ms Wallam is a kid and Gina is meant to be a CEO/Leader who should know how to handle people from all walks of life and IMO the onus was on her to take some control and sort it out rather than taking her bat and ball and going home. Netball Australia wanted to talk, sort it out and I presume convinced Wallam to wear the logo but Gina had left the building after throwing the toys out the cot and ruined a golden opportunity to get some credibility in the community. Andrew Bolt had his say in the Herald Sun today about his mate Gina and it wouldnt even make good fish and chip paper it was that cringe worthy when he too had a chance to point out the only way forward in Aus is to get people talking and fix problems rather than run away from them like his buddy Gina did.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 06:09:27 pm
She has given them 4 months notice.................

Generous to a fault.

Wisecracks aside, no individual player or NA as a governing body made any comments about ending the sponsorship deal. One of the players "reportedly" said she did not want to wear the logo because of her concerns about the company’s record on Indigenous issues. There's nothing in anything that I can't find about individual players or NA setting a future direction about the deal. There's nothing about any dialogue, any attempts to discuss the issues. Once Hancock became aware of the stance taken by the team, they offered a 4 month olive branch and pulled the deal. Yes, 4 months is better than nothing, but it's not really the point IMO.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on October 24, 2022, 06:29:10 pm
Agree Paul and EB.
Does anyone actually think Gina has ever had any interest in sport, recreation and health ?
All she wanted was to appear to be a good corporate citizen with minimal outlay and zero compassion, a bit of PR.
She couldn't even muster a token chat, maybe she should talk to her extended aboriginal family...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 06:41:20 pm
Agree Paul and EB.
Does anyone actually think Gina has ever had any interest in sport, recreation and health ?
All she wanted was to appear to be a good corporate citizen with minimal outlay and zero compassion, a bit of PR.
She couldn't even muster a token chat, maybe she should talk to her extended aboriginal family...

I try to avoid cynicism as much as possible, but I tend to agree. To my eyes, it seems as though the slightest provocation was sufficient grounds for her to pull the plug. I mean let's face it, that protest action by the players was pretty weak. How much offence / damage could that possibly cause Rinehart ? I'm not sure Rinehart's reputation was all that great even before this started.

I think we will see this mess more and more in the future. Big companies and sporting organisations were never really comfortable bedfellows IMO.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 24, 2022, 07:22:53 pm
Agree Paul and EB.
Does anyone actually think Gina has ever had any interest in sport, recreation and health ?
All she wanted was to appear to be a good corporate citizen with minimal outlay and zero compassion, a bit of PR.
She couldn't even muster a token chat, maybe she should talk to her extended aboriginal family...
Maybe she doesn't need to:

“Recent media misreporting has been disappointing, particularly given at no stage did Hancock insist its logo be worn on the Australian Diamonds‘ playing dress for the recent games in New Zealand, nor did the Australian Diamonds refuse to wear the Hancock logo.”

Some in the Indigenous community had previously defended Ms Rinehart, saying she did a large amount of charitable work and that she should not be judged because of what her father said.

Clinton Wolf, managing director of the National Indigenous Times, wrote in an op-ed on Monday that the negativity towards the Netball Australia sponsorship was “hypocritical”

“While others have criticised her from the sidelines, she does deeds with a good heart,” he said. “Actions always speak louder than words.”
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 24, 2022, 07:39:15 pm
Generous to a fault.

Wisecracks aside, no individual player or NA as a governing body made any comments about ending the sponsorship deal. One of the players "reportedly" said she did not want to wear the logo because of her concerns about the company’s record on Indigenous issues. There's nothing in anything that I can't find about individual players or NA setting a future direction about the deal. There's nothing about any dialogue, any attempts to discuss the issues. Once Hancock became aware of the stance taken by the team, they offered a 4 month olive branch and pulled the deal. Yes, 4 months is better than nothing, but it's not really the point IMO.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-11261287/Gina-Rinehart-sponsorship-Netball-national-team-sparks-anger-Sharni-Norder.html

This was our former Australian captain's views 3 weeks ago.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 07:55:18 pm
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-11261287/Gina-Rinehart-sponsorship-Netball-national-team-sparks-anger-Sharni-Norder.html

This was our former Australian captain's views 3 weeks ago.

The plot thickens. Apparently she addressed the current playing group,, and her gripe is about climate denialism, not Indigenous issues. But I take your point.

The Daily Mail ? Surely not. You'd be hard pressed to find a more egregiously trashy tabloid.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/oct/15/diamonds-pressure-netball-australia-into-crisis-talks-over-deal-with-mining-magnate
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 24, 2022, 08:17:44 pm
I just googled to find the story I recalled hearing on radio a couple of weeks ago.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 24, 2022, 08:25:17 pm
I just googled to find the story I recalled hearing on radio a couple of weeks ago.

👍
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 24, 2022, 09:51:52 pm
Only idiots bite the hands that feed you.  Im not stupid enough to believe that Hancock need the sponsorship or the advertising to promote her brand,  nor do they do it out of the kindness of her heart.  Odds are its a tax offset for Hancock.  Cost incurred to pay less tax on profits.

Thing is at the heart of all of it is respect and pride.

Gina can get that tax dump anywhere.  If she believes that the competition she is sponsoring are disrespectful and ungrateful she may as well sponsor an Olympic athlete, or the Sunday league under 14s badminton instead for the same money.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 25, 2022, 06:51:14 am
I think this topic/discussion should end here or be moved, this is after all the The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread.
Mods?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 25, 2022, 08:52:53 am
I think this topic/discussion should end here or be moved, this is after all the The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread.
Mods?

That’s easier said than done 🙄

It has become clear that the crux of the issue is the failure of Gina Rinehart to reject her father’s  genocidal beliefs and not the environmental impacts of Hancock Prospecting.  Then there’s the inept management of Netball Australia and corporate sponsorship in general.  All worthy topics for new threads but not really appropriate for this thread.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 25, 2022, 09:12:30 am
Only idiots bite the hands that feed you.

Well then, 3 Leos, I must be an idiot as when the chieftain of a not-for-profit I did at times refuse sponsorship from certain industries. Values were more important than dollars.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 25, 2022, 09:20:41 am
Only idiots bite the hands that feed you.  Im not stupid enough to believe that Hancock need the sponsorship or the advertising to promote her brand,  nor do they do it out of the kindness of her heart.  Odds are its a tax offset for Hancock.  Cost incurred to pay less tax on profits.

Thing is at the heart of all of it is respect and pride.

Gina can get that tax dump anywhere.  If she believes that the competition she is sponsoring are disrespectful and ungrateful she may as well sponsor an Olympic athlete, or the Sunday league under 14s badminton instead for the same money.
Apologies to the mods for digressing ..
Gina gets her tax dump via the Institute of Public affairs where she offloads millions .
The IPA is nothing more than a front for the Liberal party to influence public opinion and you only have to check the senior office bearers/ board and see names like Abbott, Kemp etc.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 25, 2022, 09:48:38 am
That’s easier said than done 🙄

It has become clear that the crux of the issue is the failure of Gina Rinehart to reject her father’s  genocidal beliefs and not the environmental impacts of Hancock Prospecting.  Then there’s the inept management of Netball Australia and corporate sponsorship in general.  All worthy topics for new threads but not really appropriate for this thread.

No it was about climate change. The narrative was changed.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 25, 2022, 09:49:09 am
Apologies to the mods for digressing ..
@ElwoodBlues1 It's not really a digression, because the tactic is widely used by corporates, politicians and environmental movements.

Really, it's a don't talk about the war moment, because they all claim higher ground and altruism while behaving exactly, and I do mean exactly, the very same way!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 25, 2022, 09:55:18 am
No it was about climate change. The narrative was changed.
It's a great example of how a debate can be hijacked by social media to push political perspectives.

I don't get why there are some linking Gina's attitudes to her father, while slamming the activities of mining divisions people have to ignore the work Gina funds for social housing and education projects in the outback. It's a bit like people bagging Bill Gates for his philanthropy. The opponents slag it off as a tax dodge, and yet she can put her money wherever she chooses so it seems bizarre that some of these groups would slap a gift horse in the mouth.

Cynically, I suspect if they managed to get Hancock kicked of the land the very same groups would be mining it heavier with less restrictive overheads faster than you can blink! It's a bit like kicking developers of the land in NSW, then next minute, building a brand new 4000 home housing estate, pretty much the same development with the same project managers and contractors but a new indigenous façade on the gates. Same goes for a bunch of energy projects, wind is bad, wind is ugly, wind is noisy, ............... next minute .................... we're building 200 new winds turbines and getting a slice of the action!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 25, 2022, 11:18:08 am
It's a great example of how a debate can be hijacked by social media to push political perspectives.

I don't get why there are some linking Gina's attitudes to her father, while slamming the activities of mining divisions people have to ignore the work Gina funds for social housing and education projects in the outback. It's a bit like people bagging Bill Gates for his philanthropy. The opponents slag it off as a tax dodge, and yet she can put her money wherever she chooses so it seems bizarre that some of these groups would slap a gift horse in the mouth.

Cynically, I suspect if they managed to get Hancock kicked of the land the very same groups would be mining it heavier with less restrictive overheads faster than you can blink! It's a bit like kicking developers of the land in NSW, then next minute, building a brand new 4000 home housing estate, pretty much the same development with the same project managers and contractors but a new indigenous façade on the gates. Same goes for a bunch of energy projects, wind is bad, wind is ugly, wind is noisy, ............... next minute .................... we're building 200 new winds turbines and getting a slice of the action!
So if Hancock wasnt into mining and owned the worlds largest wind and solar farm, her money would be good right?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 25, 2022, 11:45:43 am
So if Hancock wasnt into mining and owned the worlds largest wind and solar farm, her money would be good right?
Sort of, if Hancock owned the world's largest wind or solar farm they might protest against the eyesore, ......... until they became stakeholders and obtained a dividend.

I'm highly cynical because I have a mate working in green energy that was dealing with these sorts of complaints, until some of the protestors got an arts grant to decorate some of the facilities like they paint old silos around the outback, and the protests went away, well at least until the grants run out!

I wonder if that overhead is included in the feasibility studies? :o

It's not hard to see how people become cynical.

btw., Does Hancock have a stake in the big Solar PV / Battery projects happening up in the top end?

Another example, wind energy is also an eyesore and shizen for potato growing, the spuds apparently will grow all crooked or stunted by the low frequency noise (infrasound), unless of course that same wind energy gives you free power or a dividend at which time it is no longer a problem and the spuds are happy!

According to some in PETA, wind farming is harmful to animals, and the government is endorsing cruelty to animals if it fails to ban sheep and cattle grazing at the foot of wind turbines. Look at these poor bastards, we've created for them a living hell!
(https://i1.wp.com/www.bioenergyconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/wind-farm-Lake-Turkana-Kenya..jpg?resize=350%2C231&ssl=1)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 25, 2022, 12:07:14 pm
No it was about climate change. The narrative was changed.

That's incorrect.

Donnell Wallam asked to be exempted from wearing the Hancock Prospecting logo because of the genocidal comments made by Lang Hancock in the 1980s.  Some in the environmental movements seized upon the team's concerns with the sponsorship and tried to change the narrative to suit their agendas ... and that's what social media picked up.  Former Diamonds captain Sharni Norder voiced concerns over Hancock Prospecting’s environmental credentials but she is not part of the team and simply helped to cloud public perception of Wallam and the team's motivation. Wallam's story, and the team's response, has been consistent throughout the entire debacle and Netball Australia's decision not to grant Wallam an exemption has been made public. 

Netball Australia's statement makes the cause of issue very clear:

“Since becoming aware of cultural sensitivities raised by a Diamonds squad member in respect of the Hancock sponsorship uniform logo placement, Netball Australia and Hancock Prospecting have been working tirelessly to acknowledge and recognise the sensitivities, to further understand the concerns of that squad member and to provide avenues for support.

Hancock Prospecting met with the Origin Australian Diamonds leadership group the day after the concerns were raised to extend its support and commitment to Netball Australia and to share experiences, understand perspectives and support these cultural sensitivities through the partnership.”

After the meeting with Hancock Prospecting, Diamonds captain, Liz Watson, said;

“As players we do know that Hancock is such a great investment for our program. We are supportive of Hancock and all the players here are as well.”

This goes back to Netball Australia's Indigenous Round in 2020 when the only Indigenous player in the competition was used to promote the round.  Sadly, she wasn't given any court time and Netball Australia apologised and admitted that it had "missed an opportunity".  This led to Netball Australia, Super Netball players, the players’ association and member organisations signing a Declaration of Commitment that pledged to break down barriers for Indigenous players.  Netball Australia failed to do abide by the declaration with its mishandling of Wallam's request.  The players upheld their commitment with their support of Wallam. 

None of this has anything to do with climate change.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 25, 2022, 01:03:49 pm
They were talking about climate change 2 weeks ago on the radio. I provided an article as proof.

If you choose not to read it then so be it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 25, 2022, 02:28:55 pm
They were talking about climate change 2 weeks ago on the radio. I provided an article as proof.

If you choose not to read it then so be it.

By "they" you mean Sharni Norder, a former captain who finished her Diamonds career in 2017 (and most recently played AFLW for Collingwood).  She was critical of Netball Australia's sponsorship agreement with Hamcock Prospecting and made the following comment at the time of the sponsorship announcement:

"As a proud Sports Environment Alliance ambassador, it's unacceptable to put our brand alongside an open climate denier.  We have put too much into our sport to give social license to a company whose profit-at-all-cost attitude puts our future in danger. Be better."

The only thing that Norder's comments have to do with the dispute that led to Rinehart pulling her sponsorship is that some media outlets mistakenly assumed that it was about environmental issues.  Wallam's concerns weren't raised until a week or so after Norder's statement and the Diamonds players did not get involved until Netball Australia refused Wallam's request to go without the Hancock logo.  The current captain made it very clear that players are supportive of the Hancock sponsorship and are not concerned about the company's environmental record.  Their sole issue is supporting their Indigenous teammate in accordance with Netball Australia's commitment as set out in their statement:

"The singular issue of concern to the players was one of support for our only Indigenous team member. We are fully committed to the Diamonds' Sister in Arms legacy and the values this represents, alongside Australian Netball's Declaration of Commitment."

Hancock Prospecting, Roy Hill, Netball Australia, the Diamonds players and Wallam all agree that the issue has only ever been about cultural sensibilities so, no, the narrative hasn't changed.  Even Norder has provided commentary on the sponsorship dispute;

“We have an Indigenous player in her very first series, Donnell Wallam, and she’s openly said – which is very tough to say by the way as a player in a new organization representing Australia – that she doesn’t feel comfortable wearing Hancock Prospecting because of what has been said in the past.”

You have simply conflated two separate narratives. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 25, 2022, 02:54:14 pm
The narrative changed because the public didn't side with the netballers on climate change so they played the race card.

Gina's daddy was a racist so she should say sorry? Yeah Nah.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 25, 2022, 03:13:32 pm
So to summarise:
Gina's Daddy was a racist
Gina didn't say sorry
Gina digs holes not put in big windmills (or batteries which are made from the stuff from the holes Gina digs)
NA are incompetent
Woke sportspeople rule
NA are in the red to the tune of $25M
Keep smiling kids.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 25, 2022, 04:56:55 pm
The biggest hole dug this week wasn't one dug by Gina! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 25, 2022, 05:20:18 pm
................................

Gina's daddy was a racist so she should say sorry? Yeah Nah.

Absolutely the correct and honourable thing to do IMO.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 25, 2022, 05:43:40 pm
"The ones that are no good to themselves and can’t accept things, the half-castes — and this is where most of the trouble comes — I would dope the water up so that they were sterile and would breed themselves out in future and that would solve the problem."
The above quote from the charming Lang Hancock is what is behind a lot of the angst, I reckon Gina might have got on the front foot and clarified that was straight out of the White Australia playbook and nothing to do with the present Hancock Prospecting's Managements views on members of the first nations community. A simple apology on behalf of her family would have done a lot of good PR wise and made her look like a decent human.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 25, 2022, 05:52:51 pm
"The ones that are no good to themselves and can’t accept things, the half-castes — and this is where most of the trouble comes — I would dope the water up so that they were sterile and would breed themselves out in future and that would solve the problem."
The above quote from the charming Lang Hancock is what is behind a lot of the angst, I reckon Gina might have got on the front foot and clarified that was straight out of the White Australia playbook and nothing to do with the present Hancock Prospecting's Managements views on members of the first nations community. A simple apology on behalf of her family would have done a lot of good PR wise and made her look like a decent human.

Yes, I agree. Even if you take a cynical position, and assert that she is simply reading from a script and probably disagrees with every word, saying sorry does make a difference, even a small one. Words do matter. Words backed by equivalent actions are even better, but the words are a good, albeit small, start.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 25, 2022, 06:08:07 pm
Yes, I agree. Even if you take a cynical position, and assert that she is simply reading from a script and probably disagrees with every word, saying sorry does make a difference, even a small one. Words do matter. Words backed by equivalent actions are even better, but the words are a good, albeit small, start.


Agree..it would be Goebbels type PR without much conviction or truth but you have to start somewhere when you come from such a low base as her Fathers comments. But its gets people talking and other companies watching and learning as the bar is raised and thats whats disappointing as no progress has been made just more folk bickering.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 25, 2022, 06:17:53 pm

Agree..it would be Goebbels type PR without much conviction or truth but you have to start somewhere when you come from such a low base as her Fathers comments. But its gets people talking and other companies watching and learning as the bar is raised and thats whats disappointing as no progress has been made just more folk bickering.

Yes, I agree. Nice post Elwood.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 25, 2022, 06:44:29 pm
They didn't want to associated with them and now they're not. What's the problem?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 25, 2022, 07:02:38 pm
Well then, 3 Leos, I must be an idiot as when the chieftain of a not-for-profit I did at times refuse sponsorship from certain industries. Values were more important than dollars.

If you can find that sponsorship elsewhere thats all well and good.

Thing is, in sports, I've been part of organisations that have battled for sponsorship and Hancock are not Australia's biggest issue when push comes to shove.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 25, 2022, 07:09:03 pm
Yes, I agree. Even if you take a cynical position, and assert that she is simply reading from a script and probably disagrees with every word, saying sorry does make a difference, even a small one. Words do matter. Words backed by equivalent actions are even better, but the words are a good, albeit small, start.


Without wanting to state anything about the original position, Kevin Rudd got up and said this sorry.

At some point, this isn't about righting wrongs its about making sure that the rage is maintained.  It's anti reconciliation and stands only to provoke and inflame.

Why do you think there is a giant backlash evey single time these matters come up?

Its because people shouldn't be made to feel guilt and shame for the ills of people that came before them.

Gallipoli literally translates to blue city in my native Greek language.  What do you think Turkey have to say about the hellespont and Gallipoli peninsula? Nothing. Its theirs was always theirs will always be theirs and nothing that anyone says will say otherwise including the conversion of Christian churches to Islamic temples.

The people that live in these places call it their home.  No apology will erase history.  If someone wronged me, asking their children to apologise on their behalf is petty.  At some point you need to let bygones be bygones and let people heal from these wounds not reinforce it and hold it against them for ever.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 25, 2022, 07:34:07 pm
Without wanting to state anything about the original position, Kevin Rudd got up and said this sorry.

At some point, this isn't about righting wrongs its about making sure that the rage is maintained.  It's anti reconciliation and stands only to provoke and inflame.

Why do you think there is a giant backlash evey single time these matters come up?

Its because people shouldn't be made to feel guilt and shame for the ills of people that came before them.
...

.......................No apology will erase history.  If someone wronged me, asking their children to apologise on their behalf is petty.  At some point you need to let bygones be bygones and let people heal from these wounds not reinforce it and hold it against them for ever.

I disagree on all points.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 25, 2022, 10:54:05 pm
I disagree on all points.

I agree to disagree with you but am intrigued as to why you removed the Greek turkey thing.

Do you agree with that bit?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 25, 2022, 11:13:39 pm
Without wanting to state anything about the original position, Kevin Rudd got up and said this sorry.

At some point, this isn't about righting wrongs its about making sure that the rage is maintained.  It's anti reconciliation and stands only to provoke and inflame.

Why do you think there is a giant backlash evey single time these matters come up?

Its because people shouldn't be made to feel guilt and shame for the ills of people that came before them.

Gallipoli literally translates to blue city in my native Greek language.  What do you think Turkey have to say about the hellespont and Gallipoli peninsula? Nothing. Its theirs was always theirs will always be theirs and nothing that anyone says will say otherwise including the conversion of Christian churches to Islamic temples.

The people that live in these places call it their home.  No apology will erase history.  If someone wronged me, asking their children to apologise on their behalf is petty.  At some point you need to let bygones be bygones and let people heal from these wounds not reinforce it and hold it against them for ever.

I’m sorry Thry but that is a complete misunderstanding of what is a complex situation.

Kevin Rudd quite rightly offered an apology for government policies that, while probably well-meaning, had dire consequences for Indigenous Australians.  Rudd’s apology had nothing to do with Lang Hancock’s genocidal rant.

It’s worth noting that Hancock was advocating genocide in the 1980s.  When did the Ottoman Empire displace the Byzantine Empire?

One could also ask when was the Islamic Al Andalus empire overthrown by the Christians (with the pagan Vikings running interference)?

Your cultural heritage doesn’t give you insight into the colonial treatment of Indigenous Australians, Melanesians, Polynesians, Native Americans, South Asians, etc.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 12:39:40 am
The narrative changed because the public didn't side with the netballers on climate change so they played the race card.

Gina's daddy was a racist so she should say sorry? Yeah Nah.

Is it so hard to separate a comment from someone who last played for the Diamonds in 2017 from the current Diamonds team members?

The only change in the narrative is in your perception.

Lang Hancock didn’t just play the race card, he played the genocide card.  Gina doesn’t have to say sorry, a simple statement about whether she agrees or disagrees with her father is all that is required.  She has been given countless opportunities but has consistently refused to state her position.

Should she be excused from adhering to basic human decency requirements because she’s filthy rich? Yeah, nah!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Lods on October 26, 2022, 07:27:35 am
Your cultural heritage doesn’t give you insight into the colonial treatment of Indigenous Australians, Melanesians, Polynesians, Native Americans, South Asians, etc.

Unless your ancestors were Irish, many of whom were dispossessed of their land by the English, murdered in great numbers, treated as less than human, left to starve during times of famine, hung and imprisoned for trivial crimes or loaded on boats and transported to the other side of the world often never to see friends and family again.

Sadly, it is probably true that once settled in the new land some of the abused became themselves abusers.

It is a complex situation.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 26, 2022, 07:46:18 am
I agree to disagree with you but am intrigued as to why you removed the Greek turkey thing.

Do you agree with that bit?


I was going to go through your post point by point, outlining why l disagreed. I know little about the "Greek Turkey thing", and not having anything to offer on the matter,  I left it out. I changed my mind and decided not to bother , and left my post as is.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 26, 2022, 08:14:11 am
How long do people have to make offers of compensation for, some will claim just once, but here we are in 2022 and many of us continue to compensate and apologise for atrocities conducted by our Grandparent's enemy in the WWI and WWII, it's absurd to think this ever ends with an apology!

Too many of the people involved in this debate long term have no interest in an apology, they aren't in it for an apology, and the claims of compensation will never end. If they were given ownership of everything, they'd send an invoice claiming ongoing maintenance!

Actions expose motives, words are meaningless.

Just like Bill Gates and his foundations, Twiggy Forest and his foundations, Gina Rinehart also does a lot of philanthropy, it's not just words, it's big dollars piled into community facilities like health centres, child care and learning, community refuges, mental health, etc., etc., etc.. You can bag those organisations for ravaging the environment, polluting the atmosphere, but you can't question the intent because they actually act while those around them only speak. They could easily just pay a bit of tax and build themselves a fresh mansion, but they don't they act, it's not just words it's actions!

The words published and spoken over the last few weeks vilifying Hancock and by association Rinehart are just that, very cheap words, political rocks thrown by socially active political apparatchiks. Who either don't have the money or won't put in to match the words they speak.

What is happening now is functionally a tantrum, biting the hand that feeds them and barking abuse hoping for more food, like a 2 year old in a supermarket isle!

It's the climate action equivalent of protesting against Gina for digging a fresh mine, while begging her to use the precious materials she finds to build a new solar farm!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 08:29:20 am
I don't see these issues as so black and white, cut and dried.

I've apologized, personally, to people who were affected by some of the unethical things my father did... not because I felt responsible for the actions of my father, but because I was confronted with someone hurting and simply needing an acknowledgement that their hurt was legitimate. A simple but important gesture that meant a great deal to the aggrieved person and aided in their healing, and required nothing more from me than sincere compassion/empathy.

However, as others have mentioned, an apology is but a start and if not followed up by effective actions, sustained effective actions, then the apology was likely nothing more than lip service to shut someone up or a superficial exercise from someone to feel better about themselves or appease some guilt. An apology, to use a gardening metaphor, is but tilling the soil in preparation for seeds, fertilizer and regular watering.

As for Gina... I don't like being so judgemental but I see nothing more than a spoilt little brat who overflows with a sense of entitlement due to her financial riches.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 08:46:26 am
If you can find that sponsorship elsewhere thats all well and good.

Thing is, in sports, I've been part of organisations that have battled for sponsorship and Hancock are not Australia's biggest issue when push comes to shove.



I wasn't motivated by knowing I could find sponsorship loot elsewhere, I was motivated to refuse sponsorship on occasions as a matter of principle. It was about values.

I also learned long ago when running a not-for-profit (indeed any business) to always be exploring and engaging multiple revenue streams. Too many in the philanthropic community rely on, say govt grants, as their sole revenue source - very, very risky, or one or two major sponsors - also risky.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 26, 2022, 09:05:31 am
How long do people have to make offers of compensation for, some will claim just once, but here we are in 2022 and many of us continue to compensate and apologise for atrocities conducted by our Grandparent's enemy in the WWI and WWII, it's absurd to think this ever ends with an apology!

Too many of the people involved in this debate long term have no interest in an apology, they aren't in it for an apology, and the claims of compensation will never end. If they were given ownership of everything, they'd send an invoice claiming ongoing maintenance!

Actions expose motives, words are meaningless.

Just like Bill Gates and his foundations, Twiggy Forest and his foundations, Gina Rinehart also does a lot of philanthropy, it's not just words, it's big dollars piled into community facilities like health centres, child care and learning, community refuges, mental health, etc., etc., etc.. You can bag those organisations for ravaging the environment, polluting the atmosphere, but you can't question the intent because they actually act while those around them only speak. They could easily just pay a bit of tax and build themselves a fresh mansion, but they don't they act, it's not just words it's actions!

The words published and spoken over the last few weeks vilifying Hancock and by association Rinehart are just that, very cheap words, political rocks thrown by socially active political apparatchiks. Who either don't have the money or won't put in to match the words they speak.

What is happening now is functionally a tantrum, biting the hand that feeds them and barking abuse hoping for more food, like a 2 year old in a supermarket isle!

It's the climate action equivalent of protesting against Gina for digging a fresh mine, while begging her to use the precious materials she finds to build a new solar farm!
^^^^
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 26, 2022, 09:12:58 am
I don't see these issues as so black and white, cut and dried.

I've apologized, personally, to people who were affected by some of the unethical things my father did... not because I felt responsible for the actions of my father, but because I was confronted with someone hurting and simply needing an acknowledgement that their hurt was legitimate. A simple but important gesture that meant a great deal to the aggrieved person and aided in their healing, and required nothing more from me than sincere compassion/empathy.

However, as others have mentioned, an apology is but a start and if not followed up by effective actions, sustained effective actions, then the apology was likely nothing more than lip service to shut someone up or a superficial exercise from someone to feel better about themselves or appease some guilt. An apology, to use a gardening metaphor, is but tilling the soil in preparation for seeds, fertilizer and regular watering.

As for Gina... I don't like being so judgemental but I see nothing more than a spoilt little brat who overflows with a sense of entitlement due to her financial riches.
WOW!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 26, 2022, 10:10:42 am
.....................................

I've apologized, personally, to people who were affected by some of the unethical things my father did... not because I felt responsible for the actions of my father, but because I was confronted with someone hurting and simply needing an acknowledgement that their hurt was legitimate. A simple but important gesture that meant a great deal to the aggrieved person and aided in their healing, and required nothing more from me than sincere compassion/empathy.

....................................................................

100% agree.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 26, 2022, 10:18:04 am
I’m sorry Thry but that is a complete misunderstanding of what is a complex situation.

Kevin Rudd quite rightly offered an apology for government policies that, while probably well-meaning, had dire consequences for Indigenous Australians.  Rudd’s apology had nothing to do with Lang Hancock’s genocidal rant.

It’s worth noting that Hancock was advocating genocide in the 1980s.  When did the Ottoman Empire displace the Byzantine Empire?

One could also ask when was the Islamic Al Andalus empire overthrown by the Christians (with the pagan Vikings running interference)?

Your cultural heritage doesn’t give you insight into the colonial treatment of Indigenous Australians, Melanesians, Polynesians, Native Americans, South Asians, etc.



The pogroms and death marches were instigated less than 100 years ago.  Turkey invaded Cyprus (dressed up in a humanitarian peach keeping mission) after the British withdrew in 1974.  These things are a lot more fresh than people think, yet here i am born in 1982, understanding that the landscape at the time is very difficult to view through a modern lens, and that is the crux of the issue.

Healing, isnt about an empty sorry.  These comments were made 30 years ago, when the "Oakleigh wogs" were a rough and tumble group from suburbia who terrorised innocent people in the name of protecting themselves.  My father drove a taxi, was beaten and robbed by a customer who called him a bloody wog along the way to leaving him hospitalised whilst he was simply putting himself through school.

The point being, that bad people say and do bad things and how we view them 30 years later 1980 vs 2022.....  These people were not even born at the time, and nothing came of the commentary and some of those beliefs were quite commonplace at that time amongs bigots and people of that persuasion. 

Without wanting to say that I understand better than anyone else, I think I am qualified to state I understand better than you think I do, and its because I myself have decided that its better to let it go and stop this from shaping your future.

On a personal level, I have grown up feeling very much a fish out of water.  Not really identifying with Australia because of my Greek heritage. and culture has at times led to people telling me that I should just head back to where I came from and then when I go on holiday being called an Australian by the Greeks.  Thing is, this can be a problem, or a good thing depending on how you look at it.  I don't think we need to silence people who are speaking out about issues, and potentially, further just maintaining the status quo, or actually making matters worse.  You will all no doubt understand that there is a certain level of angst between Macedonians who claim not to be of Greek heritage, and Greeks who declare that the only true Macedonians are Greek.  This is, I recognise that history has made this murky, and modern nationalism has shaped these mentalities to the situation where two differently alligned people currently are butting heads over the names, cultures, and history of the region.  Thing is, It all goes back to the same old same old chest thumping, modern borders are drawn and re drawn over and over again, and sometimes people of some political persuasions are in favour, and others are not.

The crux of the problem is simply one of interpretation and the issue is one of Balkan Politics.  Rather than getting angry about it, its easier to recognise that this landscape has changed a lot, and anyone declaring a truth is only declaring one version of it.  Hancock likely stated racist views.  Gina shouldnt have to pay for it or apologise for it if she doesnt show them herself.  How does her organisation do its business?

https://www.hancockprospecting.com.au/projects/philanthropy/education-and-the-community/

So sponsoring NAIDOC week since 2012 isnt enough?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on October 26, 2022, 10:36:09 am
The pogroms and death marches were instigated less than 100 years ago.  Turkey invaded Cyprus (dressed up in a humanitarian peach keeping mission) after the British withdrew in 1974.  These things are a lot more fresh than people think, yet here i am born in 1982, understanding that the landscape at the time is very difficult to view through a modern lens, and that is the crux of the issue.

Healing, isnt about an empty sorry.  These comments were made 30 years ago, when the "Oakleigh wogs" were a rough and tumble group from suburbia who terrorised innocent people in the name of protecting themselves.  My father drove a taxi, was beaten and robbed by a customer who called him a bloody wog along the way to leaving him hospitalised whilst he was simply putting himself through school.

The point being, that bad people say and do bad things and how we view them 30 years later 1980 vs 2022.....  These people were not even born at the time, and nothing came of the commentary and some of those beliefs were quite commonplace at that time amongs bigots and people of that persuasion. 

Without wanting to say that I understand better than anyone else, I think I am qualified to state I understand better than you think I do, and its because I myself have decided that its better to let it go and stop this from shaping your future.

On a personal level, I have grown up feeling very much a fish out of water.  Not really identifying with Australia because of my Greek heritage. and culture has at times led to people telling me that I should just head back to where I came from and then when I go on holiday being called an Australian by the Greeks.  Thing is, this can be a problem, or a good thing depending on how you look at it.  I don't think we need to silence people who are speaking out about issues, and potentially, further just maintaining the status quo, or actually making matters worse.  You will all no doubt understand that there is a certain level of angst between Macedonians who claim not to be of Greek heritage, and Greeks who declare that the only true Macedonians are Greek.  This is, I recognise that history has made this murky, and modern nationalism has shaped these mentalities to the situation where two differently alligned people currently are butting heads over the names, cultures, and history of the region.  Thing is, It all goes back to the same old same old chest thumping, modern borders are drawn and re drawn over and over again, and sometimes people of some political persuasions are in favour, and others are not.

The crux of the problem is simply one of interpretation and the issue is one of Balkan Politics.  Rather than getting angry about it, its easier to recognise that this landscape has changed a lot, and anyone declaring a truth is only declaring one version of it.  Hancock likely stated racist views.  Gina shouldnt have to pay for it or apologise for it if she doesnt show them herself.  How does her organisation do its business?

https://www.hancockprospecting.com.au/projects/philanthropy/education-and-the-community/

So sponsoring NAIDOC week since 2012 isnt enough?

So Gina does this good work purely because she feel a kindred love for these, the (generally) poorest of the poor ?
Or does she claim a nice big fat tax deduction and get her portrait painted of herself in flowing robes astride a white stallion amongst “her people” ?
Nothing wrong with tax deductions, we all all get some sort of benefit from them, personally I’ve got more time for the guy who gives $10 to the Sally at the turnstile on Saturday arvo then million/billionaires who give large amounts for the swank factor.

In the Australian sense a lot of the “wog” stuff was pure ignorance and as people on both sides have integrated it has greatly diminished but not gone… Which of course leads back to nationalism, which is truly an evil political tool.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 26, 2022, 11:18:11 am
I've apologized, personally, to people who were affected by some of the unethical things my father did... not because I felt responsible for the actions of my father, but because I was confronted with someone hurting and simply needing an acknowledgement that their hurt was legitimate.
I get that, ............... but what compensation did you offer?

There is a world of difference between apologising and it being accepted, it seems if Joe Blogs makes an apology it's accepted, but if a millionaire or billionaire offers an apology or reparation it isn't, it'll either be disingenuous, insufficient, or outright offensive!

Isn't that a worry to you, or do different rules apply based on wealth and standing? :o

If you happen to be a billionaire, is your apology only accepted along with a cheque?

Like I said, lots of freely available carbon emissions protestors, even protestors against green energy blighting the landscape, that all fade into the earth when they get a cut of the game! It's pretty demoralising, and poses some very genuine questions about the integrity of humanity.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 12:26:25 pm
I get that, ............... but what compensation did you offer?

First and foremost it wasn't about compensation, it was about acknowledgement. Then listening to what they wanted or thought was reasonable and having those communications valued. Nothing earth-shattering. Just basic decency and honest communication.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 26, 2022, 01:30:59 pm
First and foremost it wasn't about compensation, it was about acknowledgement. Then listening to what they wanted or thought was reasonable and having those communications valued. Nothing earth-shattering. Just basic decency and honest communication.
You cannot generalise that to everyone, and that is the point I am making.

It's not valid to apply that experience globally, and it's not valid to apply that experience to someone like Rinehart, Gates, Forrest, etc., etc., because they both live under and are judged by a different set of rules. Put them in the identical circumstance and let them replicate 100% of what you have done, and instead of being accepted they will be judged as recidivists!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 02:04:53 pm
Why are folk assuming that Indigenous Australians want an apology from Gina?

They simply want to know whether she agrees or disagrees with Lang’s genocidal beliefs. 

I would have thought that would be a fairly simple undertaking 🤔
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Lods on October 26, 2022, 02:24:12 pm
Why are folk assuming that Indigenous Australians want an apology from Gina?

They simply want to know whether she agrees or disagrees with Lamg’s genocidal beliefs. 

I would have thought that would be a fairly simple undertaking 🤔

That seems pretty straight forward question.

Has anyone asked her?
And if so, what was her response?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 26, 2022, 02:26:31 pm
Why are folk assuming that Indigenous Australians want an apology from Gina?

They simply want to know whether she agrees or disagrees with Lamg’s genocidal beliefs. 

I would have thought that would be a fairly simple undertaking 🤔

The question is insulting. She doesn't have to answer.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 02:28:10 pm
You cannot generalise that to everyone, and that is the point I am making.

It's not valid to apply that experience globally, and it's not valid to apply that experience to someone like Rinehart, Gates, Forrest, etc., etc., because they both live under and are judged by a different set of rules. Put them in the identical circumstance and let them replicate 100% of what you have done, and instead of being accepted they will be judged as recidivists!

I doubt they'd be judged as recidivists. People moving millions or billions about are not excluded from empathy, decency and honest communications.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 03:12:44 pm
That seems pretty straight forward question.

Has anyone asked her?
And if so, what was her response?

Yes, she has been asked many times and always refuses to answer.  That is why Donnell Wallam was reluctant to wear the Hancock Prospecting logo.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 03:28:44 pm
The question is insulting. She doesn't have to answer.

Why is the question insulting? 

The founder of the company Gina inherited made an outrageous, racist comment advocating genocide.  It is perfectly reasonable, and in the public interest, to want to know whether she holds the same views. 

Gina is happy to express her opinion on a wide range of subjects, including accusing Rose Porteous of murdering Lang.  Answering a simple, straightforward question shouldn’t be too difficult for her.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 03:30:04 pm
The question is insulting. She doesn't have to answer.
Why is the question insulting?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on October 26, 2022, 03:31:25 pm
Just saw, David, you asked the same question...  :))  :))
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 26, 2022, 03:33:02 pm
Why is the question insulting?

Agree. Given the quotes and other snippets that have made it into the public arena, her attitude to workers and the great unwashed generally, any concerns about her social attitudes and empathy appear to be well founded.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 26, 2022, 03:37:12 pm
Because you all assume she is racist and she might be but she hasn't done anything to deserve to be asked the question.

Anyway this was all a distraction after she was called a climate denier.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 26, 2022, 03:41:32 pm
So Gina does this good work purely because she feel a kindred love for these, the (generally) poorest of the poor ?
Or does she claim a nice big fat tax deduction and get her portrait painted of herself in flowing robes astride a white stallion amongst “her people” ?
Nothing wrong with tax deductions, we all all get some sort of benefit from them, personally I’ve got more time for the guy who gives $10 to the Sally at the turnstile on Saturday arvo then million/billionaires who give large amounts for the swank factor.

In the Australian sense a lot of the “wog” stuff was pure ignorance and as people on both sides have integrated it has greatly diminished but not gone… Which of course leads back to nationalism, which is truly an evil political tool.
I don't get too caught up with the WOG thing.  Only time I ever really got my back up about it was when I was told to go back to where I came from, and that I shouldn't be proud of my culture in the same way indigenous folk are.  My friend and I came up with a saying in school that we would just roll off right back, and that was to say that we were wogs and we are not shy, we would rather eat souvlaki than a bloody meat pie (I did like a pie, but thats besides the point).  I reserve that human right as they should and largely I brought that up for an example of the mentality of the Australia I grew up in and what was "acceptable" of that time, was very different to the one we live in today.

We arrived at Melbourne airport from Hawaii on monday, and as we were arriving at our gate, the pilot announced to everyone that we acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the land on which we <gather/meet> today, and pay my respects to their Elders past and present. I extend that respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples here today and to thanks us for flying with Jetstar.  This happens frequently in meetings, sporting events and like today.  There is proper social change occurring in our nation regarding this issue and that will continue as far as I can tell.

When it comes to Hancock, its not about being a faux champion or tax incentives etc (you will notice I brought that up earlier as to why they do this stuff to begin with, because there is an incentive to).  The tell is what and whom they are willing to sponsor in the name of that tax deduction.  Scholarships for indigenous people on the link I quoted and sponsoring NAIDOC week isn't just about a tax dodge.   She could have sponsored any organization on the planet and obtained the same tax dodge.  I've deliberately avoided commenting on the work in the PILBARA region as that is linked to her work, and ergo is more about good will and buying her company into mining resources in those areas because that is likely less genuine, but that doesnt diminish that she is actually willing to champion the efforts of Indigenous people and not just sponsor the Swan Districts under 18's for the same net result.

Thing is, she doesn't have to sponsor NAIDOC, and rather than pass judgement on her mentality (I personally think she is more $$ driven than anything else) but am simply pointing out that actions speak louder than words and anything she states will be perceived hollow and apologist rubbish anyway because people are cut from the same cloth as their parents or some other such nonsense.

Hancock seniors views were common place at the time of speaking.  That doesn't make them right but if people cant recognise she would be on a hiding to nothing and putting oxygen back into that discussion and will only server to dig them up and expose them to the world (AGAIN) and fuel additional outrage IMHO. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 26, 2022, 03:48:31 pm
Offering Australians $2 an hour and threatening to bring in foreign workers is insulting...
Gina doesn't have to apologise for her father but stating her position and the companies position on those Lang Hancock comments and how they affect today given Ms Wallans concerns is a given imho.
People would have moved on by now if she had some common sense rather than taking up defensive positions.
The Hancock website is full of cherry picked articles supporting her position and it's such a small pitiful amount of money in the scheme of things and a bruised ego that has led to this position.
Be the bigger person Gina and give them the sponsorship in full and you will get the respect you want....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 26, 2022, 04:27:26 pm
People moving millions or billions about are not excluded from empathy, decency and honest communications.
There are some rather heavy qualifiers in that assertion, and I'm sure the profiles fit many if not most, but it's not most we are interested in is it?
 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 26, 2022, 04:30:36 pm
Offering Australians $2 an hour and threatening to bring in foreign workers is insulting...
Gina doesn't have to apologise for her father but stating her position and the companies position on those Lang Hancock comments and how they affect today given Ms Wallans concerns is a given imho.
People would have moved on by now if she had some common sense rather than taking up defensive positions.
The Hancock website is full of cherry picked articles supporting her position and it's such a small pitiful amount of money in the scheme of things and a bruised ego that has led to this position.
Be the bigger person Gina and give them the sponsorship in full and you will get the respect you want....


They don't want her sponsorship.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on October 26, 2022, 04:31:56 pm
Anyway this was all a distraction after she was called a climate denier.
I have to agree @madbluboy, the media coverage is reading a bit like mob rule, I get the motives of some are altruistic, but not all, and it's the same story being repeated over and over again. Political and social media rock throwing.

Nobody, and I do mean nobody be they paupers or princes, should have to be subject to and accept social media abuse as a given.

I assert again, what's happening now is a tantrum from those who want Rinehart's cash but not the association with her profile, I suppose they would take it in secrecy! Odd given many of the same people propagate a lack of transparency as a negative against the fossil fuel industry, mining, transport, etc., etc.!

Brown paper bags at 50 paces!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 04:55:17 pm
Because you all assume she is racist and she might be but she hasn't done anything to deserve to be asked the question.

Anyway this was all a distraction after she was called a climate denier.

Gina's refusal to answer a simple question about her attitude to the genocide of Aboriginal Australians proposed by the founder of the company she inherited could well imply that she shares her father's views.  A short, simple dialogue between Gina and Donnell could have resolved the issue before it blew up.  Instead Gina decided to walk away and have a crack at Donnell for "virtue signalling".

Gina has made no bones about being a climate change denier, but that was never an issue for the current Diamonds players.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on October 26, 2022, 05:15:45 pm
Because you all assume she is racist and she might be but she hasn't done anything to deserve to be asked the question.

.................

If you're on a football forum, and you're trying to speculate on a character profile based on limited knowledge, you go with consistency over surprise. Given her comments about abolishing minimum wage, Aussies working harder and partying and socialising less, veiled threats about overseas workers happy to earn $2 / hour in her mines (basically slavery), you'd be perfectly justified in questioning her attitudes to the downtrodden, the disempowered and those doing it tough.

No, she hasn't endorsed her dad's comments, but neither has she repudiated them, as sometimes, as Dylan so beautifully put it, "the silence can be like thunder."
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 26, 2022, 05:26:09 pm
Offering Australians $2 an hour and threatening to bring in foreign workers is insulting...
Gina doesn't have to apologise for her father but stating her position and the companies position on those Lang Hancock comments and how they affect today given Ms Wallans concerns is a given imho.
People would have moved on by now if she had some common sense rather than taking up defensive positions.
The Hancock website is full of cherry picked articles supporting her position and it's such a small pitiful amount of money in the scheme of things and a bruised ego that has led to this position.
Be the bigger person Gina and give them the sponsorship in full and you will get the respect you want....

EB, in 2022, do you think the response from the CEO of a company would be anything other than something like "I do not condone or agree with any of the statements made by my father in the 1980s" ? It would be a meaningless exercise in my view and I would bet my balls there would be people who would say "well of course thats what she'd say, what a WOFT". As MBB said, I would find it insulting to be asked the question if I had never been accused of saying something like that, held a similar position, if I employed the number of indigenous people she employs/sponsors and did the amount of charity work she does for the indigenous communities. Again Ill go back to what I said at the start, here is what should have happened:
- Concerned player contacts her employers to voice her more than legit concerns.
- NA shows true leadership by immediately calling in the player concerned and a Hancock rep (preferable the Big Cahuna herself) before the media crap storm broke to to discuss the concerns and come a resolution in private.
Ill guarantee you, NA would be $15M richer and the player would be convinced that the comments made by an individual decades ago are not representative of the same company today.

Instead today, the first thing players, organisations etc do is grab their phones, jump onto social medial and adopt the Ready-Fire-Aim approach and here we are, reputation tarnished for ever.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 26, 2022, 06:08:48 pm
They don't want her sponsorship.
I think Ms Wallan wanted a bit of empathy which cost nothing, I believe the netballers were going to get a rise in money but pride and posturing got in the way of common sense like it usually does.
The bigger person needed to just give a little and we might have had a happy ending....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 26, 2022, 06:25:47 pm
EB, in 2022, do you think the response from the CEO of a company would be anything other than something like "I do not condone or agree with any of the statements made by my father in the 1980s" ? It would be a meaningless exercise in my view and I would bet my balls there would be people who would say "well of course thats what she'd say, what a WOFT". As MBB said, I would find it insulting to be asked the question if I had never been accused of saying something like that, held a similar position, if I employed the number of indigenous people she employs/sponsors and did the amount of charity work she does for the indigenous communities. Again Ill go back to what I said at the start, here is what should have happened:
- Concerned player contacts her employers to voice her more than legit concerns.
- NA shows true leadership by immediately calling in the player concerned and a Hancock rep (preferable the Big Cahuna herself) before the media crap storm broke to to discuss the concerns and come a resolution in private.
Ill guarantee you, NA would be $15M richer and the player would be convinced that the comments made by an individual decades ago are not representative of the same company today.

Instead today, the first thing players, organisations etc do is grab their phones, jump onto social medial and adopt the Ready-Fire-Aim approach and here we are, reputation tarnished for ever.
GTC, Short of a law suit for the reasons why.... I think Gina could do with some good PR. Mining company CEO's apologise for digging holes and fecking up the environment all the time,its part of the job CV.
Eg...MELBOURNE, Australia-- Comments attributable to Rio Tinto chief executive Jean-Sebastien Jacques

“Rio Tinto will fully cooperate with the Inquiry by the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia while also continuing to support the West Australian government in the reform of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA). We are committed to engaging with the rest of the industry, Traditional Owner Groups, and federal and state governments across a number of areas relating to cultural heritage approvals and processes, and the broad contribution of the resources sector to Australia.

“We are very sorry for the distress we have caused the PKKP in relation to Juukan Gorge and our first priority remains rebuilding trust with the PKKP.  Rio Tinto has a long history of working in partnership and creating shared value with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities around our operations and across Australia more broadly.  We remain absolutely committed to continuing to do so.

“We believe the mining industry has a critical role to play in contributing to the future prosperity of all Australians.”

A Genuine sorry...probably not, but well worded and what was required to move on.

This is the big end of town though...my problem is that Ms Wallan is a inexperienced kid not a Government Minister, not the head of a company or a experienced First Nations Leader. As I said before this could have been settled with a cup of tea, a Tim Tam and letting the kid feel important enough that her voice was being heard by the most powerful woman in the country.
A bit of reassurance and parenting 101 skills from Gina and it would have been happy days instead of the train wreck it is now....maybe I am asking a lot of Gina given the struggles she had with her own kids...money the root of all evil I guess...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on October 26, 2022, 08:01:51 pm
GTC, Short of a law suit for the reasons why.... I think Gina could do with some good PR. Mining company CEO's apologise for digging holes and fecking up the environment all the time,its part of the job CV.
Eg...MELBOURNE, Australia-- Comments attributable to Rio Tinto chief executive Jean-Sebastien Jacques

“Rio Tinto will fully cooperate with the Inquiry by the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia while also continuing to support the West Australian government in the reform of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA). We are committed to engaging with the rest of the industry, Traditional Owner Groups, and federal and state governments across a number of areas relating to cultural heritage approvals and processes, and the broad contribution of the resources sector to Australia.

“We are very sorry for the distress we have caused the PKKP in relation to Juukan Gorge and our first priority remains rebuilding trust with the PKKP.  Rio Tinto has a long history of working in partnership and creating shared value with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities around our operations and across Australia more broadly.  We remain absolutely committed to continuing to do so.

“We believe the mining industry has a critical role to play in contributing to the future prosperity of all Australians.”

A Genuine sorry...probably not, but well worded and what was required to move on.

This is the big end of town though...my problem is that Ms Wallan is a inexperienced kid not a Government Minister, not the head of a company or a experienced First Nations Leader. As I said before this could have been settled with a cup of tea, a Tim Tam and letting the kid feel important enough that her voice was being heard by the most powerful woman in the country.
A bit of reassurance and parenting 101 skills from Gina and it would have been happy days instead of the train wreck it is now....maybe I am asking a lot of Gina given the struggles she had with her own kids...money the root of all evil I guess...

Gina's parenting skills leave a bit to be desired according to her own children.  She is a money hungry cow, but I dont believe she is necessarily a bigot to go with it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 26, 2022, 08:20:52 pm
Gina's parenting skills leave a bit to be desired according to her own children.  She is a money hungry cow, but I dont believe she is necessarily a bigot to go with it.
Her children are entitled, money sapping grubs.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 26, 2022, 08:28:15 pm
GTC, Short of a law suit for the reasons why.... I think Gina could do with some good PR. Mining company CEO's apologise for digging holes and fecking up the environment all the time,its part of the job CV.
Eg...MELBOURNE, Australia-- Comments attributable to Rio Tinto chief executive Jean-Sebastien Jacques

“Rio Tinto will fully cooperate with the Inquiry by the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia while also continuing to support the West Australian government in the reform of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA). We are committed to engaging with the rest of the industry, Traditional Owner Groups, and federal and state governments across a number of areas relating to cultural heritage approvals and processes, and the broad contribution of the resources sector to Australia.

“We are very sorry for the distress we have caused the PKKP in relation to Juukan Gorge and our first priority remains rebuilding trust with the PKKP.  Rio Tinto has a long history of working in partnership and creating shared value with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities around our operations and across Australia more broadly.  We remain absolutely committed to continuing to do so.

“We believe the mining industry has a critical role to play in contributing to the future prosperity of all Australians.”

A Genuine sorry...probably not, but well worded and what was required to move on.

This is the big end of town though...my problem is that Ms Wallan is a inexperienced kid not a Government Minister, not the head of a company or a experienced First Nations Leader. As I said before this could have been settled with a cup of tea, a Tim Tam and letting the kid feel important enough that her voice was being heard by the most powerful woman in the country.
A bit of reassurance and parenting 101 skills from Gina and it would have been happy days instead of the train wreck it is now....maybe I am asking a lot of Gina given the struggles she had with her own kids...money the root of all evil I guess...

Are you angling for the role of Hancock Prospecting PR guru EB?

Perhaps that should be common sense guru?

A meeting with Wallam, with or without the rest of the team, could have allayed her concerns and Rinehart could continue to publicly avoid the question.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: madbluboy on October 26, 2022, 08:45:10 pm
Her children are entitled, money sapping grubs.

Do you watch Succession? Great show.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on October 26, 2022, 08:50:18 pm
Do you watch Succession? Great show.
Love it
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on October 26, 2022, 08:52:47 pm
I can't believe the air-time this whole Gina / NA thing has got.
Personally, i couldn't give a f*** about the whole situation one way or another, and don't care to delve into it the whole scenario, but i think it highlights how much we are missing footy that its the hot topic.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 27, 2022, 12:49:09 am
Are you angling for the role of Hancock Prospecting PR guru EB?

Perhaps that should be common sense guru?

A meeting with Wallam, with or without the rest of the team, could have allayed her concerns and Rinehart could continue to publicly avoid the question.
DJ, I'd probably find working my way up to that princely sum of $2 an hour from Generous Gina a tad unders for what would be a full time job trying to find enough smoke and mirrors to conceal her public relations disasters..
What do they say about common sense...it's not that common?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 27, 2022, 11:50:54 am
And Donnell Wallam scored the winning goal with a last second lay up 🙂
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on October 27, 2022, 12:17:35 pm
Brian Cook has had his say on sport and sponsorships saying the club will make the final decision not any woke players but he is happy to listen to their views.
Don't have the link but he seemed fairly forthright in his opinions..
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on October 27, 2022, 12:28:14 pm
Brian Cook has had his say on sport and sponsorships saying the club will make the final decision not any woke players but he is happy to listen to their views.
Don't have the link but he seemed fairly forthright in his opinions..

A good administrator would be all over any potential player concerns and would avoid or nip them in the bud.  Giving the players the confidence and licence to raise concerns with the appropriate club authority would be a key to avoiding controversy.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on October 27, 2022, 12:47:14 pm
How do you spell poker machines Brian ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 10, 2022, 04:34:56 pm
Not sure if this should be here or in the car thread, but I heard today that a US coach builder is trying to resurrect the DeLorean as a hydrogen powered eco-car.

The poor mans AMG GT, what next a hydrogen P76?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on November 10, 2022, 06:18:27 pm
Not sure if this should be here or in the car thread, but I heard today that a US coach builder is trying to resurrect the DeLorean as a hydrogen powered eco-car.

The poor mans AMG GT, what next a hydrogen P76?

Let's hope the quality and reliability are better than the originals.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on November 10, 2022, 07:57:24 pm
I recently watched a video about a company called Janus here in Oz that converts trucks (heavy prime movers) to full electric.
Well thought out and engineered. I watched a video from a Truck Driver who road tested one on Facebook which was great, here are a few links of other stuff.

https://www.januselectric.com.au

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUwdHtC5Dms


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 10, 2022, 09:51:54 pm
The ones that have won me based on technology are Hyzon. People see the name and think they are Chinese, but they are a US Technology firm already building hydrogen heavy transport for the USA. They've recently setup shop in Victoria.
https://www.hyzonmotors.com
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: spf on November 11, 2022, 02:32:39 am
A lot of people are looking at Solar panels, any good experiences the forum wants to share? Any reputable installers vs never do business with 'these' guys?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on November 11, 2022, 07:12:12 am
A lot of people are looking at Solar panels, any good experiences the forum wants to share? Any reputable installers vs never do business with 'these' guys?
I might also look into it, the problem I need to get over is how hideous they look from the street. My daughter had some installed at her place and they had a great experience, Ill get the details from her however I believe it depends on where you live.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on November 11, 2022, 07:23:12 am
A lot of people are looking at Solar panels, any good experiences the forum wants to share? Any reputable installers vs never do business with 'these' guys?
https://365solar.com.au
These are the people that did my daughters, they are based in Epping (northern suburbs).
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on November 11, 2022, 08:17:39 am
Most companies selling SolarPV use subbies, so you can get good or bad results from the same supplier unrelated to the panel quality.

Not sure about the panels at the moment, supply is an issue and it seems quality is highly variable. Most of the panels come through just 2 or 3 wholesalers, nearly all of them out of China, even the ones that claim they aren't Chinese usually means they aren't Chinese owned but the panels are still usually Made in China.

Part of the trick therefore is to find a good installer, it makes the difference.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: spf on November 11, 2022, 04:52:10 pm
Okay, thanks for the replies, maybe those that know list your top two or three? Let's see if a trend emerges.

I suspect LP may be onto something with sub-contractors. There is however the issues of warranty and whether the company will be in business 10 years from now etc.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on November 11, 2022, 06:00:35 pm
Most companies selling SolarPV use subbies, so you can get good or bad results from the same supplier unrelated to the panel quality.

Not sure about the panels at the moment, supply is an issue and it seems quality is highly variable. Most of the panels come through just 2 or 3 wholesalers, nearly all of them out of China, even the ones that claim they aren't Chinese usually means they aren't Chinese owned but the panels are still usually Made in China.

Part of the trick therefore is to find a good installer, it makes the difference.
Preferred the LG(now defunct) and USA made panels, the Chinese ones are rubbish like everything else they make but because they are cheaper they get traction in Australia and sold in package deals.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on November 11, 2022, 06:33:37 pm
A lot of people are looking at Solar panels, any good experiences the forum wants to share? Any reputable installers vs never do business with 'these' guys?
We got them before it was trendy....10+ years ago now.

At the time it was a good investment and i worked out that it was going to pay itself off in 7-8 years.
Then the feed in tarrifs went off a cliff and the efficiency of the system dropped. I never worked it out, but it was going to take more than double the time to pay it off. They only have a life cycle of 25 years before they are junk....and thats if they don't stop working sooner. Good luck finding the company that supplied/installed them as they are about stable as crypto. I don't think the feed-in rates have increased but i know power price has increased and not sure how that affects things.

We've recently moved into a new house and will be selling that one shortly. Not sure how much the weight of the panels are to blame, but the ceiling in the main living room under the panels have started pushing the plaster down and creating humps which may or may not have happened otherwise, but needs to be fixed.

Now we have a new place, with a stronger roof structure and no panels......and we have no interest in getting them again unless something dramatic changes. Financially, its not worth it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on November 11, 2022, 10:47:36 pm
Our place had solar panels when we bought it.  The previous owner was a sparky and that means that we inherited a mix of state of the art electrics and incomplete wiring 🙄

We have a local company that specialises in energy efficient electrical applications as well as your bog standard electrician’s jobs.  Their work is highly regarded in our community and I think that’s the key to finding a competent, reliable solar panel installer.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 10, 2022, 10:49:56 am
Perhaps it's just me, but the Solar PV industry demanding better infrastructure sits a bit uncomfortably with me.

They've spent years telling us that the lack of uptake was holding us back, we were filthy dirty global polluters for not covering our roofing will pilot dazzling glittering glaring glass panels that roast our northern neighbour.

Now as installations accelerate courtesy of public subsidies, they tell us they can't achieve targets because "The Grid" the public provides them freely is insufficient for purpose.

At the same time they poo poo Dan's plan to put energy back in public control, and lambaste the old world energy for destroying the planet. But wasn't it the SEC and the Coal burners that built the grid, the very grid that Solar PV uses freely without any commitment to improve, maintain or manage it in any way whatsoever. They come across like a reformed smoker preaching salvation while sucking on a high-tec vape!

Such is another false economy and glaring hypocrisy of the so called "renewables" sector!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 10, 2022, 09:57:15 pm
A bloke across the street had solar panels being installed yesterday. Reminded me to look into mine and what it was when i installed.

10-ish years ago, i was getting 32c buyback rate. Las time i checked, i was getting 8c buyback rate. That is 1/4 of the initial price.
Now its good with all the government insentives and what not, but still, its not even close to what is used to be.

If the government are serious about getting this industry up and running they would provide similar rebates to what they used to have.

FWIW, a mate of mine got some years before me and locked in a long-term deal of 50c rebate and was absolutely racking it in.
Unfortunately, energy companies lose too much money on those kinda deals....so its not actually about the environment and being green, but (as we all suspected all along) its the bottom line that matters most.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 11, 2022, 09:08:41 am
Solar feeds create a over voltage problem for the Grid which means they often switch off the feeds for stability reasons so Power companies don't need the power and won't pay high rebates.
Current flows from the highest voltage point to the lowest point so to push solar feeds down the line the Grid Voltage has to be raised. Too many snouts in the trough and you end up with voltages above 250v and that won't fly on a old 240v infrastructure system.
Solution is to average down the voltage and make everyone run on a 230v system but that means changing the the bulk of the infrastructure which costs big money.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 11, 2022, 10:52:50 am
Solar feeds create a over voltage problem for the Grid which means they often switch off the feeds for stability reasons so Power companies don't need the power and won't pay high rebates.
Current flows from the highest voltage point to the lowest point so to push solar feeds down the line the Grid Voltage has to be raised. Too many snouts in the trough and you end up with voltages above 250v and that won't fly on a old 240v infrastructure system.
Solution is to average down the voltage and make everyone run on a 230v system but that means changing the the bulk of the infrastructure which costs big money.
Noted.

It's not a problem caused by the state of the grid or the general public, it's a problem caused by the Solar PV, yet the renewables sector paint it as an issue of maintenance and upgrade and want the public to pay to fix it!

If this was a Ferrari owner, lobbying to make the roads better so Ferrari owners can drive faster and safer, the public wouldn't even consider paying for the road upgrade.

If the renewables sector need a grid that operates in a different regime so it can meet it's potential, then Solar PV / Renewables sector should subsidise the upgrade just like coal and gas did!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 14, 2022, 08:34:14 am
Interesting the US announce progress in Nuclear Fusion at NIF by having an NNSA Director tell the media how important the breakthrough was for nuclear weapons research.

Not a single mention of clean energy.

It's quite a bit of a tell about the state of the US psyche!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 14, 2022, 09:18:13 am
Interesting the US announce progress in Nuclear Fusion at NIF by having an NNSA Director tell the media how important the breakthrough was for nuclear weapons research.

Not a single mention of clean energy.

It's quite a bit of a tell about the state of the US psyche!

Propaganda is propaganda.

That message in the current world state of play is not for anyone interested in saving the world and clean energy.  Its a statement to show the world how much further ahead the USA is than they are.

The Artemis mission to the moon came from nowhere, and all of a sudden they are orbiting the moon and splash down.

Any statement made publically by the USA is one to advise their enemies how much further ahead they are.  Its an answer to a question no one asked, designed to make them ask that question.  In the context of the ongoing Ukraine/Russia struggle, it all makes perfect sense for them to talk nuclear weapons.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 14, 2022, 10:01:46 am
Propaganda is propaganda.

That message in the current world state of play is not for anyone interested in saving the world and clean energy.  Its a statement to show the world how much further ahead the USA is than they are.

The Artemis mission to the moon came from nowhere, and all of a sudden they are orbiting the moon and splash down.
@Thryleon Yes, the poltical stuff just shows you where the US public headspace is at, even if the polticians are not the same it's clear evidence they know the US public has a parnoia.

FYI, Artemis itself has been around for over a decade it's hardly an overnight occurrence. It was initially announced back in Obama's era, and formally funded a few years later initially as Exploration Mission-1, built on the earlier Ares, SLS and Orion programs some of which are more two decades old.

Often the media tout these big projects as the latest and greatest tech, but in reality by the time they fly projects like Artemis, JWST, and others are already obsolete or superseded, most of these missions started planning and technical design back in the 90s.

As an IT person you'll not be surprised to hear they still use "space hardened" versions of 90s era CPUs and Chipsets in these machines, PowerPC, x86, etc, etc.. The most critical thing for them is reliability and predictability, using tech they have an intimate knowledge of already, they rarely use "new" in developments like this.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 14, 2022, 10:21:38 am
Yep wouldn't surprise me to see rudimentary operating systems.  They were way less buggy than the stuff we use every day.  They are less capable of performing graphics intense stuff, but they don't really need any of that on a space rocket.

ECC is a by product of atmospheric radiation (this is a memory thing).

It basically came about on the back of an election counting precisely 4096 too many votes.  They discovered that bit flipped from 0 to a 1.


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 14, 2022, 10:55:14 am
ECC is a by product of atmospheric radiation (this is a memory thing).

It basically came about on the back of an election counting precisely 4096 too many votes.  They discovered that bit flipped from 0 to a 1.
Yes, nanometre or smaller sized semiconductor devices and cosmic rays do not mix, so the much older micron scale silicon hardware turns out to be more reliable.

Many people do not realise it, but some of the old Apollo era electronic circuits were partly made of large scale woven materials, some of it hand knitted by artisans and forming part of the crafts panels and linings. They did this partly because they feared that radiation of space would destroy small  scale components. Weird isn't it, now flexible electronics is a frontier, life is like a merry-go-round!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 11, 2023, 11:24:00 pm
I worry the collapse of Sun Cable will be just the first in a series of Green Energy failures, but to me it's inevitable simply because the promises from much of the Renewable Energy industry are just as ethereal as the promises of clean coal!

Pundits will claim the clean green energy industry has been hijacked by profiteers, but in reality it's a mirage, because clean green and renewables do not necessarily mean low carbon or sustainable, even though it's freely implied in the renewable marketing, I doubt even the brochures the investment portfolio comes printed on can be fully recycled!

That doesn't mean clean and green isn't the right thing to pursue, it just means the current version of it stinks to high heaven!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 12, 2023, 08:16:11 am
Here is one of the hidden issues related to EVs, weight!
Quote
An official with the US Dept Tranport, Jennifer Homendy, raised the issue in a speech in Washington to the Transportation Research Board. She noted, by way of example, that an electric GMC Hummer weighs about 9,000 pounds (4,000 kilograms), with a battery pack that alone is 2,900 pounds (1,300 kilograms)—roughly the entire weight of a typical Honda Civic.

"I'm concerned about the increased risk of severe injury and death for all road users from heavier curb weights and increasing size, power, and performance of vehicles on our roads, including electric vehicles," Homendy said in remarks prepared for the group.

The extra weight that EVs typically carry stems from the outsize mass of their batteries. To achieve 300 or more miles (480 or more kilometers) of range per charge from an EV, batteries have to weigh thousands of pounds.
End users do not realise, but the weight of a battery required to match a tank of fuel can be as high as 10x the mass of that tank of fuel. In a typical 4-door sedan configuration an 80L tank holds about 75kg of fuel for 650km on a typical use cycle, for the same range the battery would have to weigh at least 650kg or more subject to the type of battery technology.

Yet it is one of the key reasons users report the elegant EV ride, they have more mass per cubic centimetre of car than just about anything else on the road. When you want something to move smoothly in a straight line, you can't beat inertia and kinetic energy!

It's pretty lucky those EVs have heaps of torque isn't it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on January 12, 2023, 04:41:06 pm
Propaganda is propaganda.

That message in the current world state of play is not for anyone interested in saving the world and clean energy.  Its a statement to show the world how much further ahead the USA is than they are.
At the same time, showing how backwards the USA is with their thinking.

When Climate change takes over the world and we all are about to die, the Americans will be sitting atop the rocky mountains with the water lapping at their feet still holding onto all their weapons ready to defend their last remaining hill against 'the enemy'. They will declare themselves the 'winners of humanity' and overlook the fact that they have also doomed humanity with their (lack of) actions at the same time.

True leaders would turn their focus to the future of the planet. Its the one thing we all have in common and the best way to defeat the enemy is to befriend them. The old the enemy of my enemy is my friend saying, with the enemy being climate change.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on January 12, 2023, 05:42:21 pm
Here is one of the hidden issues related to EVs, weight!End users do not realise, but the weight of a battery required to match a tank of fuel can be as high as 10x the mass of that tank of fuel. In a typical 4-door sedan configuration an 80L tank holds about 75kg of fuel for 650km on a typical use cycle, for the same range the battery would have to weigh at least 650kg or more subject to the type of battery technology.

Yet it is one of the key reasons users report the elegant EV ride, they have more mass per cubic centimetre of car than just about anything else on the road. When you want something to move smoothly in a straight line, you can't beat inertia and kinetic energy!

It's pretty lucky those EVs have heaps of torque isn't it?
I read if you put a EV battery config in a large dual cab ute you will be adding the weight of a Honda Civic to the Ute.
Our roads are only designed to take a certain weight with regards total car mass and given 40% of new vehicles sold are of the large Ute variety good luck dodging the dents and holes in the roads which means Vicroads will be looking to increase its earnings which means we will all be paying for those EV Utes.
And good luck with the range on those 3.5 tonne unladen full EV Utes with a Caravan or boat attached when your weekend getaway to Knobs creek finds your intrinsic value for Kilometres specified cut by plenty thanks to all that extra weight.
https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/2023-ldv-et60-review-electric-ute
So its not much use for towing or offroad and has sub par handling.....but it will look impressive in the primary school carpark picking up the kids at twice the price of a combustion version and you are doing your bit for cleaner air. Good luck to LDV , they are going to need it....


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on January 12, 2023, 06:50:31 pm
I read if you put a EV battery config in a large dual cab ute you will be adding the weight of a Honda Civic to the Ute.
Our roads are only designed to take a certain weight with regards total car mass and given 40% of new vehicles sold are of the large Ute variety good luck dodging the dents and holes in the roads which means Vicroads will be looking to increase its earnings which means we will all be paying for those EV Utes.
And good luck with the range on those 3.5 tonne unladen full EV Utes with a Caravan or boat attached when your weekend getaway to Knobs creek finds your intrinsic value for Kilometres specified cut by plenty thanks to all that extra weight.
https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/2023-ldv-et60-review-electric-ute
So its not much use for towing or offroad and has sub par handling.....but it will look impressive in the primary school carpark picking up the kids at twice the price of a combustion version and you are doing your bit for cleaner air. Good luck to LDV , they are going to need it....




Adding to the above, if you add that much extra weight via battery to these utes, you have to limit the amount they can carry....which defeats the purpose!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on January 12, 2023, 11:26:23 pm
Yes, EV batteries are heavy; 625kg for a 100kw Tesla battery.  However, EVs have other weight savings; electric motors weigh around 45kg and there's no transmission as such.  Typical ICE vehicles have a 150kg engine and a 100kg transmission plus exhaust, fuel pump, fuel tank, fuel, filters, fuel lines, DPFs, oil, etc, say another 100kg. 

A Hilux has a kerb weight of 2100kg and a GVM of 3100kg.  An EV Hilux would have a kerb weight of around 2500kg and, therefore, its payload would be reduced to 600kg or four hefty chaps and a couple of eskies full of refreshments. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on January 13, 2023, 08:23:57 am
Quote
Word has it that an electric version of the Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series recently broke the dynamometer at the Denso Automotive Systems’ testing facility in Clayton during testing in its state-of-the-art climatic chamber.

Kerb weight and GVM haven’t been released but the price tag is $200K 🫤
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 13, 2023, 12:17:58 pm
Adding to the above, if you add that much extra weight via battery to these utes, you have to limit the amount they can carry....which defeats the purpose!
This is what started the whole debate, in the US it appears much of this has slipped past the regulators, as it does technology usually moves faster than the law.

The law makers and officials are just starting to catch up which what the basis of the quote I posted earlier. To drive one of these EV Utes or 4WD equivalents with a large boat or trailer the rules around GVM and road safety are going to need revision.

Also, when you think about battery mass versus charge and range, you can see that some of the claims being made by EV makers must be bullcrap, there seems to be unavoidable physics between battery mass and capacity that put limits on what is possible.

Further more, here in Oz, the grid/network just doesn't exist to allow too many of these big capacity EVs to roam around and be rapidly recharged, they consume so much juice overnight, it's like having a small factory on wheels to set up shop in random overnight locations and suck down the kilowatts. FYI, slow charge is typically 2kW/hr to 3kW/hr, and those big batteries take 30 to 40hrs to slow charge 80% as they hold 80kW or more at full charge. So to travel any major distance for a few days with the usual overnight stays they need fast chargers that suck down 30kW/hr to 50kW/hr of juice to deliver a suitable range the next morning. For reference most peoples home will average in summer with the air-conditioning on somewhere under 6kW/hr, maybe they get to 10kW/hr average if they also have the oven, dishwasher, kettle and dryer running! But over 24hrs the average comes in under 5kW/hr, it's no coincidence that solar panel installs are typically 5kW!

The beautiful thing about EVs, is that the laws of physics for electrical engineering are well known, and motors and transformers are already very efficient. So do not be sucked into some company claiming they found a new way to improve efficiency or range outside of providing bigger batteries, any such claim is bullcrap because there isn't enough scope left in designs to gain anything significant! Work done(kilometers driven or loads towed) have to obey the basic kinetic and potential energy equations. Unfortunately, the car industry is still full of people who grew up on "our car is more efficient" or "more economical", so much of the same spin remains.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on January 13, 2023, 04:02:22 pm
it's no coincidence that solar panel installs are typically 5kW!
I think you should revise that statement. At least if you are referring to your typical residential solar panel install.

The reason that they are about 5kw, is that is about the real estate available on your average house.

When i got mine 10-odd years ago, we got 3.3kw simply due to price, but was an upgrade on what the standard install was at the time. If we maxed out our roof space, we
The beautiful thing about EVs, is that the laws of physics for electrical engineering are well known, and motors and transformers are already very efficient. So do not be sucked into some company claiming they found a new way to improve efficiency or range outside of providing bigger batteries, any such claim is bullcrap because there isn't enough scope left in designs to gain anything significant! Work done(kilometers driven or loads towed) have to obey the basic kinetic and potential energy equations. Unfortunately, the car industry is still full of people who grew up on "our car is more efficient" or "more economical", so much of the same spin remains.
'New technology' will come in terms of KERS and the like. Recovering energy, thus using less energy by comparison.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 14, 2023, 01:04:36 pm
I think you should revise that statement. At least if you are referring to your typical residential solar panel install.

The reason that they are about 5kw, is that is about the real estate available on your average house.
True there is a limit to the capacity based on the available area, but that's not the reason why capacity has stalled at 6kW.

Firstly, for many years 5kW feed in was the legal cap, this was to prevent the grid being overloaded by changes in cloud cover.

Secondly, because houses typically require about 2 - 3kwh on average there is no motivation to deliver higher capacity, they are already a factor of 2 or 3 above the daily average, which over about 3/4 of the year is enough, add to that the assumption that batteries will become better and cheaper and can store the surplus, and that the energy efficiency of households will improve reducing the consumption. Hopefully, we all have liquid fuel cells on on premise hydrogen generators that can store energy during daylight hours and hand it back overnight.

When feed in tariff were higher, there was some motivation to install bigger systems, but now the feed in tariffs are much lower and the ROI exceeds the average life of the installation.

Add to that, I bet it won't be long before fridges, ovens, dishwashers, washing machines, all sorts of appliances come with built in smart battery systems, storing the energy they need during daylight hours to function overnight. This modular lower cost option seems to be the better way to approach the problem than large monolithic cells. It would also naturally adds capacity to overcome the vast majority of blackouts.

When i got mine 10-odd years ago, we got 3.3kw simply due to price, but was an upgrade on what the standard install was at the time. If we maxed out our roof space, we 'New technology' will come in terms of KERS and the like. Recovering energy, thus using less energy by comparison.
Regalrdess of KERS and other technologies, they can only work in the difference margin between 100% efficiency and real world efficiency. It's not much, the biggest potential gains are to come from thermal efficiency / management where the bulk of the loss occurs in inductive systems like motors, electromagnets and switching(mechanical or solid state). A lot of the waste energy is lost heating stuff we do not need heated, but even so it's typically less than a 10% or 15% gain to be made in older systems, and in many modern systems it's less than 5%.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 25, 2023, 11:23:17 am
Guess what is becoming the next big environmental issue, with a push to restrict / limit resource consumption to be floated at the next COP meeting?

Environmental damage from the production of batteries!

What will that mean long term for the use of EVs or Home Solar Batteries?

Functionally, we need a new battery technology and quickly, perhaps even faster than we need more renewable energy! Lithium mining is a disaster, and battery production is one of the dirtiest industries on the planet, perhaps even dirtier than the fossil fuel industries it replaces. Ignore those posters showing lab like pristine conditions with efficient machinery pumping out mass produced batteries by the metre. That lab is the con, the last shiny stage of the process at best, what they don't show you is the filthy bucket chemistry and sweat shop conditions used to refine and prepare the raw materials.

Even though lithium is abundant, naturally occurring lithium of the required quality is very rare. For example Australia is one of the worlds richest lithium sources,  but the vast bulk of the lithium mined in Australia has to be greatly enriched before it can be used, much like we have to reprocess and enrich uranium and pretty much any other materials we mine. Guess what, like our Iron Ore and Aluminium much of which is no longer refined here, we ship it offshore in bunker fuel burning antifouling coated biohazard bulk barges for refining elsewhere!

None of that you will find the Uber Green TBL investor report, just a little accounting oversight, we can put the revised numbers in later via are mailout! ;)

And those tailings, yes the evil word again which describes mining waste, can be reprocessed to produce all sorts of ancillary raw materials, but they aren't in much the same way tailings from other mining operations aren't reprocessed. Sure, they are selling the fact that they can, but what they omit from the marketing blurb is that they don't, they don't because it's expensive and inefficient to reprocess tailings when you can go somewhere else and get what you need from a rich vein. And much like refining or reprocessing uranium, the further you get through the process the bigger the problem becomes with the residual.

The stuff left behind from battery production is truly toxic as is pretty much any other form of mass industrial waste.

But luckily we've got a border policy, that waste and the toxic environment and atmosphere it creates will just have to stay in China, because we won't give it a VISA!

Best Regards,
Your Loving Nimby!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on January 25, 2023, 11:46:58 am
I generally agree that this seems a bit round about way to achieve greener energy for a net break even with different pollutants, but the one thing that battery and electricity and solar has over oil and petrol based technology, is the ability to power stuff in outer space.  I reckon thats the real push behind the technology going mainstream because we arent going to setup bases on the moon and mars without solar and batteries unless we go nuclear and even then you need water which isnt an abundant source.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 25, 2023, 01:28:20 pm
I generally agree that this seems a bit round about way to achieve greener energy for a net break even with different pollutants, but the one thing that battery and electricity and solar has over oil and petrol based technology, is the ability to power stuff in outer space.  I reckon thats the real push behind the technology going mainstream because we aren't going to setup bases on the moon and mars without solar and batteries unless we go nuclear and even then you need water which isn't an abundant source.
Actually, I had thought similar that SolarPV was the way of the future for local space.

But just last week I read that there are a whole bunch of upcoming NASA / ESA launches that are going the in the opposite direction and reverting to nuclear batteries known as Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators(RTG). Apparently heat management (heating and cooling) is a big issue that consumes a lot of energy, which rules out SolarPV because the surface area needed exceeds the launch capability for a single vehicle on many rockets. The various Space Stations are unique because they were built in stages from multiple launches.

In the past RTGs were reserved for big projects, because they took up a lot of space, were heavily built and very expensive, but apparently the new generation of devices is lighter, smaller and cheaper and also longer lasting!

RTGs don't fail if they collect too much dust!

Some of this is being driven by the realisation that if they had been equipped with better power sources(aka Not SolarPV) many of the recent Mars missions would have lasted decades like Voyager I and II. One of the recent missions had a few failed experiments simply because the project ran out of energy budget before it had succeeded, or failed because it was consuming too much energy to get it working so they shut it down.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on January 25, 2023, 10:08:55 pm
Actually, I had thought similar that SolarPV was the way of the future for local space.

But just last week I read that there are a whole bunch of upcoming NASA / ESA launches that are going the in the opposite direction and reverting to nuclear batteries known as Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators(RTG). Apparently heat management (heating and cooling) is a big issue that consumes a lot of energy, which rules out SolarPV because the surface area needed exceeds the launch capability for a single vehicle on many rockets. The various Space Stations are unique because they were built in stages from multiple launches.

In the past RTGs were reserved for big projects, because they took up a lot of space, were heavily built and very expensive, but apparently the new generation of devices is lighter, smaller and cheaper and also longer lasting!

RTGs don't fail if they collect too much dust!

Some of this is being driven by the realisation that if they had been equipped with better power sources(aka Not SolarPV) many of the recent Mars missions would have lasted decades like Voyager I and II. One of the recent missions had a few failed experiments simply because the project ran out of energy budget before it had succeeded, or failed because it was consuming too much energy to get it working so they shut it down.
the mars missions all exceeded expectations and were extended.

The dust on the panel was a hindrance, but not so bad that it caused any mission to end early for the rovers.

Either way space will need a mix of tech because irrespective of what power source we go with, only the sun exists everywhere.

Even if you went nuclear initially you'd want a backup solar in case of failure.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 09:14:34 am
Vanadium redox flow batteries can provide cheap, large-scale grid energy storage. Here's how they work (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-02-02/vanadium-redox-flow-battery-and-future-of-grid-energy-storage/101911604), abc.net.au.

A New ‘Glue’ Could Make Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Cheaper—And Less Toxic (https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2023/02/01/a-new-glue-could-make-lithium-ion-battery-recycling-cheaper---and-less-toxic/?sh=45aa8d495da3), Forbes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 02, 2023, 01:33:34 pm
Vanadium redox flow batteries can provide cheap, large-scale grid energy storage. Here's how they work (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-02-02/vanadium-redox-flow-battery-and-future-of-grid-energy-storage/101911604), abc.net.au.

A New ‘Glue’ Could Make Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Cheaper—And Less Toxic (https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2023/02/01/a-new-glue-could-make-lithium-ion-battery-recycling-cheaper---and-less-toxic/?sh=45aa8d495da3), Forbes.
Good links.

It's not lost on me and it's quite bizarre that it takes a foreign investor to gain any traction on an Australia invention, I see it happen over and over again, locals get zero interest from the Feds or local Venture Capitalists, so the ideas get sold off to foreigners who commercialise it making a killing.

Flow batteries are a very serious option for buildings and homes, and should be receiving far more attention than Elon Musks rare element highly marketed and expensive(read profitable) alternatives. I read a while back that the basic installation hardware is everlasting in a flow battery and doesn't wear out, and you can change the electrodes and electrolyte as easy as Fish'n'Chip shop changes oil.

(Personally, I think LAVO (https://www.lavo.com.au) is the way to go for homes and domestic vehicle charging, anyone old enough to remember The Heater man knows why!)

The lithium battery glue although a great idea is a trivial issue, the big problem for lithium ion isn't breaking the batteries down physically, it's reprocessing the ingredients that have become oxides or carbides. FWIW, the very same is now being done for cellphone assemblies, the glue can be "programmed to fall apart" under the right conditions. But let's not get too excited about the glue, and using sodium hydroxide to trigger the laminate to crumble isn't really an environmentally sweet solution to the problem, but it'll be easier and cheaper because it's basically paint stripper something that is already mass produced very very cheaply, but not so easy to dispose of in bulk!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 03:41:59 pm
As the article says, though, the inventors of the flow batteries were 20 years too early. The application for the patent was filed in 1986 and would have run out in 2001 before storage was much of an issue. Until solar panels and renewable energy became popular, supply was regular given coal-fired power plants. That’s the thing about renewable power. Developing the technology couldn’t be done in a linear planned fashion. Some parts of the system are developed before they can be used or before they can lead to an identifiable benefit.

An example of that is the electric vehicle market. When the electricity that would recharge them was generated by burning coal or gas, the argument was that there was no point electrifying cars as the pollution was merely shifted from 1 place to another. That led to minimal investment in creating electric vehicles and recharging stations. Now there is cleaner energy available, we’re playing catch up in those areas.

That’s why I’m not so persuaded by arguments based on existing technology. The developments cited in those 2 articles are merely 2 of many being evaluated now. What will be available in 2030 will be light years ahead of what currently exists. And we need to develop infrastructure to take advantage of it rather than saying, “There are issues with current technology, so let’s put it on the back burner until all those issues are resolved”. On the other hand, nuclear fission and fossil fuels are mature markets with much less scope for improvement. Clean coal is a joke and they should stop trying to make fetch happen. Nuclear fusion on the other hand is intriguing.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 02, 2023, 05:18:14 pm
The big recent advances in flow batteries are related to the electrolyte, the fundamental technology hasn't changed much but the electrolyte in the original days was a problem as it deteriorated quickly, a few dozens of recharges and it had to be replaced. The modern electrolytes can potentially last decades. Also the anodes and cathodes have improved, but not as much as the electrolyte.

Hydrogen fuel cells, even combined with Fusion or Fission not just renewables, are a real zero carbon winner. You produce the hydrogen when there is heaps of energy to spare, and regenerate electricity on demand when needed. You can distribute hydrogen through existing channels, pipelines, bulk carriers, gas bottles, etc., etc., or you can even make it onsite from local renewables and let it charge your car overnight or even refill a hydrogen car directly from the reserve. It fits with Fusion or Fission because both technologies need base load, you can make hydrogen 24x7 even when there is no grid demand, in much the same way fission plants get paired up with desalination plants.

(It's really a no brainer for Oz as the driest continent on the planet, and one of the richest in uranium, to use fission for base load, we can make all the fresh water we need and all the relatively cheap electricity, it's that simple! Eventually we will replace the fission with fusion, but we will still need to pair fusion with a base load probably  desalination plant, because most of the current fusion projects get the fuel from seawater, as a by-product of desalination.)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 05:37:46 pm
The recent frantic search for the tiny capsule of radioactive material lost during transport fills me with great confidence over nuclear fission.  :o

And until hydrogen is generated using renewables rather than burning coal and making vague promises that there’ll be effective carbon capture at some stage this century, I’ll have my concerns.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 02, 2023, 06:29:42 pm
The recent frantic search for the tiny capsule of radioactive material lost during transport fills me with great confidence over nuclear fission.  :o

A drop in the ocean
vs
Continual, consistent deterioration of air quality, ozone layer and a potentially (if not already) irreversable runaway greenhouse scenario.

Its like the frog in the pan. Turn it up slow enough and it will stay there until its cooked!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 06:54:41 pm
Actually, that thing about frogs in a pan is frog$hit. Unless they’re anaesthetised, of course.

Maybe it would make more sense if you substituted a climate change denialist for the frog. You’d just have to find a pan big enough to fit Craig Kelly.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 02, 2023, 07:51:47 pm
And until hydrogen is generated using renewables rather than burning coal and making vague promises that there’ll be effective carbon capture at some stage this century, I’ll have my concerns.
So hydrogen isn't allowed to be developed using the very same energy source that was used to develop solar panels and wind turbines. ::)

There are directions other than left in this world!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 02, 2023, 08:03:45 pm
Actually, that thing about frogs in a pan is frog$hit. Unless they’re anaesthetised, of course.

Maybe it would make more sense if you substituted a climate change denialist for the frog. You’d just have to find a pan big enough to fit Craig Kelly.
I know its BS, but its an analogy.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 08:07:51 pm
Aren’t we talking about the continual burning of fossil fuels to drive the electrolysis that separates the hydrogen and oxygen? Maybe you might be able to tell us whether there will be any real reduction in greenhouse gases produced in that way compared to the continued use of petrol in cars and the like.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 02, 2023, 08:09:25 pm
Maybe the frogs could hoist themselves out of the water by their own bootstraps?

Not sure saying it’s an analogy works any better than Michael Palin saying, “It was a pun!”
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 03, 2023, 08:35:57 am
Aren’t we talking about the continual burning of fossil fuels to drive the electrolysis that separates the hydrogen and oxygen? Maybe you might be able to tell us whether there will be any real reduction in greenhouse gases produced in that way compared to the continued use of petrol in cars and the like.
Just as solar panels were developed for over three decades using the base load supply at the time which was fossil fuel, hydrogen production will be developed using whatever base load supply is currently available.

Only mindless renewable advocates and the battery industry pump that hydrogen producing base load supply up as being purely sourced from coal or gas. Even a cursory examination exposes the bullcrap that hydrogen is only produced by burning coal. I don't blame them, it's about money, and lots and lots of it, maybe even your superannuation depends on some renewables performing well and continuing to receive subsidies!

At this stage, over the full battery lifecycle, even using the very latest available technologies including big flow batteries, hydrogen is a better option than batteries for storing excess solar PV or Wind generate power.

A genuine problem is that the best performing hydrogen fuel cells are patented, but I suspect eventually the global governments will work around that much as they have with vaccines. But that's not a technical argument, although opponents will paint it as the old world profiteering in an attempt to steer investors away, it again is all about money and the smeller is as bad as the fella!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 03, 2023, 09:47:15 am
As always, the devil’s in the details. The production of hydrogen in the Latrobe Valley uses coal gassification:

Quote from: HESC
Hydrogen was extracted from Latrobe Valley coal and a mixture of biomass at a newly constructed plant located at AGL’s Loy Yang Complex in the Latrobe Valley through gasification and refining. Carbon offsets were purchased to mitigate emissions from the pilot. In the commercial phase, carbon dioxide would be captured during this process and stored deep underground in a process known as carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Even if totally green electricity were available to the producers, the gassification process releases copious greenhouse gases. That required carbon offsets in the pilot phase and would need carbon capture to work in the commercial phase. Carbon capture at the level needed is pie in the sky stuff. Has it even worked successfully at an experimental level? Green hydrogen via electrolysis would be a less risky proposition when it comes to combatting climate change but only if the vast amount of electricity required comes from renewable sources.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on February 03, 2023, 11:39:05 am
im wary of carbon offset.

To me its throwing money at pretending to be environmentally friendly.  Sure, its supposed to go to green initiatives but does it actually or does it fuel profits?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 03, 2023, 12:24:25 pm
Yep. In principle, it might work but it’s easy to scam.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/23/australias-carbon-credit-scheme-largely-a-sham-says-whistleblower-who-tried-to-rein-it-in (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/23/australias-carbon-credit-scheme-largely-a-sham-says-whistleblower-who-tried-to-rein-it-in)

I was amazed that in the EU shifting from coal-fired to wood-fired power generation has been seen as part of their contribution to fighting climate change, simply because it’s a renewable power source. I guess it’s all about the definitions you use.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 03, 2023, 03:27:28 pm
im wary of carbon offset.

To me its throwing money at pretending to be environmentally friendly.  Sure, its supposed to go to green initiatives but does it actually or does it fuel profits?

100%.

Money can get you far in life.

To steal a large chunk of cynicism from LP.
Businesses are better of paying for carbon offsets rather than change anything they are doing.
I'd hazard a guess that not only is it cheaper to handover cash than to change the way they do things (machinery, factory setups, transportation etc etc etc) but it would probably give them a nice tax break in the process by reducing their profit margins, as well as 'donating' to the environment....which in turn gives them a nice gold star with investors and what not.

There is very little incentive for them to move away from what they are actually doing. Its potentially more beneficial to keep the status quo.
Propaganda!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 04, 2023, 03:50:09 pm
Interesting response to a stupid Matt Canavan tweet attacking Green Hydrogen and lauding Blue Hydrogen:
The Australian’s back-of-the-envelope green hydrogen figures are overblown and forget climate impact (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/10/the-australians-back-of-the-envelope-green-hydrogen-figures-are-overblown-and-forget-climate-impact), The Guardian.

What a flog Canavan is. Why would you bother to consider a ridiculous scenario in which Australia is the sole supplier of Hydrogen to the world?  It’s about as sensible as considering whether the Australian Defence Forces would be able to defeat the aliens from Independence Day. Of course, even after making that ridiculous assumption he goes on to fudge his results.

But the article points out the problem with using Blue Hydrogen to combat climate change:

Quote
But Beck said comparing green hydrogen with blue hydrogen was like “comparing apples and oranges”. While green hydrogen would use more land, her own published work suggests blue hydrogen would have a sizeable greenhouse gas footprint.

She said even if the CCS industry could capture 90% of the emissions from the production stage of blue hydrogen, that would still release about 1Mt of CO2 for each 1Mt of hydrogen.

But Beck said if emissions from extracting and processing the natural gas before it’s turned into hydrogen were also counted, this would see blue hydrogen responsible for “a whopping 1314Mt of CO2-e in a year to make 530Mt of blue hydrogen in Australia, using 1961Mt of natural gas.”

For context, that is almost three times Australia’s current greenhouse gas footprint.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 04, 2023, 10:04:17 pm
I get it, everybody does, but coal gasification is not the only way to produce hydrogen, and certainly not the long term way, in the long term electrolysis or catalysis will be the main method in conjunction with seawater desalination processes.

btw., Those emissions figures are a bit out of date, they are referring to gasification the old way, which is like the cooking version of a wood fired oven. There are several new techniques under development right now that use bioreactors to generate hydrogen from brown coal, with methane and other useful industrial or commercial gases as the principle by-products, but it doesn't suit the political perspective of some in the renewables sector to discuss these options. They've even been trying to have funding for the projects and Newcastle Uni and ANU to be cut on environmental grounds! That only proves to me how disingenuous the renewables sector is about reducing greenhouse gas, the actions expose profit as their primary motivation.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 04, 2023, 11:05:34 pm
More likely they’re used to the fossil fuel industry peddling nonsense like carbon capture and clean coal and they’re not going to be conned again. No doubt scientists funded by the fossil fuel industry will be more than happy to promise miracles that are only a few years away, but only if we keep faith with the little black rock. As the Minerals Council of Australia tells us, “Coal. It’s an amazing thing.”

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1039036982786817 (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1039036982786817)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 04, 2023, 11:33:09 pm
By the way, methane is one of the worst greenhouse gases and it’s pretty audacious to try to sell blue hydrogen on the basis that it produces commercially useful gases like methane. That brings to mind the cigarette industry’s promotion of the health benefits of smoking.

If methane is burnt, carbon dioxide is produced. And I’m guessing the blue hydrogen producers aren’t going to store ad infinitum methane byproducts that are surplus to commercial needs.

Garbage dumps that capture the methane created by decomposition and burn it to produce power are minimising the damage created in disposing of waste. But releasing methane trapped in coal is not in the public interest when hydrogen can be created without creating carbon dioxide and methane.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 05, 2023, 07:44:55 am
While politicians squabble and the populace does little to change their ways after decades of overdoing it, things go from bad to worse :

https://theconversation.com/global-carbon-emissions-at-record-levels-with-no-signs-of-shrinking-new-data-shows-humanity-has-a-monumental-task-ahead-193108
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 05, 2023, 10:57:24 am
By the way, methane is one of the worst greenhouse gases and it’s pretty audacious to try to sell blue hydrogen on the basis that it produces commercially useful gases like methane. That brings to mind the cigarette industry’s promotion of the health benefits of smoking.

If methane is burnt, carbon dioxide is produced. And I’m guessing the blue hydrogen producers aren’t going to store ad infinitum methane byproducts that are surplus to commercial needs.

Garbage dumps that capture the methane created by decomposition and burn it to produce power are minimising the damage created in disposing of waste. But releasing methane trapped in coal is not in the public interest when hydrogen can be created without creating carbon dioxide and methane.
Your lifestyle doesn't exist without methane, it's a base ingredient of many of the materials and chemicals you use hundreds of times a day, like it or not cars, clothing, building materials, pharmaceuticals, appliances, paint, pretty much every modern material or surface treatment has been touched by methane in the resource or material supply chain.

By the way, methane is fractionally short lived compared to CO2, so while methane is far more reactive, it's gone form the environment in just a fraction of the time that CO2 exists, consumed by organisms as a building block of life, so nature uses it in much the same way humans use it to manufacture and engineer materials.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 05, 2023, 11:09:22 am
But I don’t recall any articles highlighting a global shortage of methane for commercial use. Presumably, the global demand is presently met by existing suppliers. Why would more be needed?

I also assume the current suppliers only produce as much as they can sell. On the other hand, the amount of methane that will be produced as a byproduct of the production of hydrogen will depend only on the targets for hydrogen production. That won’t stop just because the methane byproduct exceeds the amount that industry can use. Will that excess be stored like the red cycle plastic that wasn’t being recycled? Or will the excess be released into the atmosphere or burnt (producing carbon dioxide)? Or maybe the mythical CCS system will store it underground (where it currently resides trapped in coal) …

As the old saying goes, you can have too much of a good thing. That’s even truer when the good thing is generally a bad thing.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 05, 2023, 11:22:39 am
But I don’t recall any articles highlighting a global shortage of methane for commercial use. Presumably, the global demand is presently met by existing suppliers. Why would more be needed?
Hmm, if you keep posting that sort of comment your leftist gas banning buddies are going to disown you!

The idea is we stop mining new sources of fossil fuels and use the what we already have as by-products of existing resources.

For example, farms in Europe are now putting pavilions over cattle and sheep not to protect them from the weather, but to catch the methane resource they emit and turn it back into the fertilizer or medicines needed.

Waste not want not!

There are many ways to solve problems, but the myopia displayed by the renewables sector isn't one of them! But they know that, which is why they are hypocrites.

I'll laugh when the lefties "revise" or "review" their political position to energy generation as Dan's SEC comes back on line, I bet Socialist Energy is somehow cleaned energy! ;D

Ironically, I'm not at all opposed to base services being controlled by democratically elected governments ahead of private entities. But the change in the left's attitude, and you know it's going to happen, will still be hypocritical.

Climate change and CO2 emissions reductions are either urgent or they are not, if CO2 emissions reduction is urgent you do everything you can to remove CO2 emission from society, including CCS, Hydrogen, Solar PV, Offsets, Wind, Tidal, Wave, etc., etc.. You don't pick one option and damn all the others! Everything, Everywhere All at Once! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 05, 2023, 12:26:02 pm
Methane is just as troublesome as carbon dioxide. While carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for longer, methane is 25 times as effective at trapping heat compared to carbon dioxide over the initial 20 year period. It’s pure sleight of hand to say we should concentrate on reducing carbon dioxide while extolling the virtues of methane.

The examples you cite are attempts to reduce the emissions of methane in existing industries by giving those industries an economic payoff. Often, those industries can’t readily reduce the amount of methane being produced. For example, garbage dumps can’t be eliminated: they’re an essential public service. By persuading the operators to capture methane and burn it to power the site, we make the best of a bad situation. Do nothing and the methane leaks into the atmosphere and poses a fire risk. Capturing it and burning it produces carbon dioxide which is unfortunate, but you have to make hard decisions. The operators reduce their energy costs so the reduction of methane pays for itself.

Livestock farming inevitably produces methane. It isn’t realistic to reduce the demand for meat and the like, so we have to make the best of it by reducing the methane emissions. Scientists are working on doing so by creating feed that will reduce the amount of methane being emitted by livestock. Apparently, adding seaweed helps to do this. And if livestock producers can be persuaded to capture the methane and use it as fertiliser or the like, that’s great (although does this merely delay its emission into the atmosphere?).

However, I don’t think there’s much doubt that governments would prefer to eliminate methane byproducts rather than persuade businesses to capture them. If governments were presented with a button they could press that would make businesses methane-free without incurring any cost, they wouldn’t be able to push it fast enough. Unfortunately, in the real world we can only try to make the best out of a bad situation.

But you aren’t proposing ways to reduce the methane emissions from existing industries. You are pushing the creation of an entirely new process which will create massive amounts of methane. And the joke of it is that you justify this by saying the end product, hydrogen, will combust without creating any greenhouse gases (which is of course true). But you want to use a process that produces heaps of carbon dioxide and methane. That wipes out the environmental benefits of hydrogen. When green hydrogen has the same benefit but without the downside of blue hydrogen, why?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 05, 2023, 02:46:40 pm
Claiming or implying methane by-products will be discharged to atmosphere is the real slight of hand in this debate, it's a valuable resource that is easily collected and converted to many useful carbon based products, turning it into waste by making the production of it illegal is certainly the foolish way to go.

Even to the extreme of capture and sequestration. One of the great ironies in the debate is leftists arguing to stop mining of fossil fuels gases like methane, I suppose the premise is just leave it in the ground where it has been safely residing for millions of years. Then the very same people arguing sequestration, that pumps reserves of such gases back to the natural reservoirs where they came from, is flawed and cannot work. Yep, another let's not talk about the war moment for renewables.

Just a small example of no methane, no disposable PPE or single use (sterile) surgical kit, no catheters, no arterial clips, no sterile packaging, just a very small sample of modern life that is produced from or with the assistance of the methane that currently comes out of natural gas reserves.

Mining fossil gas is a process that can be mostly or completely replaced through the use of the methane by-products collected of gasification, farming and recycling / composting. Nobody is claiming they are to be vented to atmosphere, that accusation is just an absurdity.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 05, 2023, 03:49:39 pm
And yet you don’t deal with the fact that the creation of methane byproduct isn’t calibrated to the level needed to satisfy demand; instead it will be proportional to the entire amount of hydrogen produced by the process you admire. It’s unlikely that demand for methane will be exactly equal to the methane byproduct and you haven’t provided any grounds to believe there won’t be excess supply. We’ve seen that already with the Red Cycle plastics fiasco. Where the collection of problematic material is divorced from the ability of businesses to convert it into another product, you end up with a storage problem.

And this all assumes that the existing production of methane will cease. But that’s optimistic. It’s not as though oil production in various countries was shut down in favour of importing oil from countries which could produce it more cheaply. The US has been hellbent on reaching oil self-sufficiency and if its own mining operations create methane gas byproduct that’s captured and used, that’s going to continue unabated. Can you imagine Australia telling the US Govt to cut the production of methane because we’re producing more blue hydrogen? Good luck with that …

If there’s an excess, one would expect the rate of excess supply to be constant or increasing as more blue hydrogen is produced. That will mean ever increasing amounts of methane to eliminate.

Of course, governments will try to find ways to convert the methane into something useful, if only to justify the continued use of blue hydrogen processes. Again, look at the Red Cycle program. It was wonderful PR for Woolies and Coles and governments that were subsidising the program that all their plastic packaging was converted into park benches and the like rather than being dumped in landfill but there was a practical limit that undercut that messaging. As the low-hanging fruit is exhausted, funding new uses for methane would become a subsidy with the taxpayer footing the bill. There are practical limits to how much methane can be used in this way.

So what will happen with the excess? Are there really enough empty spaces underground to store massive amounts of methane along with massive amounts of carbon dioxide? Is there no end to that magic? Can we build huge containers for it? Or do we burn the methane and then bury the carbon dioxide in the endless natural storage compartments below the surface.

Maybe we could just make sure the EPA is looking the other way when there are accidental releases of methane by the blue hydrogen producers or when CCS fails. After all, too much regulation would be bad for business.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 05, 2023, 05:44:02 pm
And yet you don’t deal with the fact that the creation of methane byproduct isn’t calibrated to the level needed to satisfy demand; instead it will be proportional to the entire amount of hydrogen produced by the process you admire. It’s unlikely that demand for methane will be exactly equal to the methane byproduct and you haven’t provided any grounds to believe there won’t be excess supply.
The demand for hydrogen won't be 100% exclusive meet by gasification methods which are just a bridge to hydrogen production via seawater electrolysis. Gasification probably can't even meet a significant fraction of the demand needed, just as Solar PV alone cannot possible meet base load demands.

Only renewables alarmists paint gasification by-products as the reason to ban the hydrogen economy.

Methane is going to be need from somewhere, it is never going to 'cease', the percentage of methane produced by hydrogen production through gasification will only provide a fraction of the methane needed for modern economies, so it's likely some gasification might be needed to help bridge the gap as mining of fossil fuels gets scaled back, but that will take decades as there are many more products produced by mining than fuels. They may even run gasification facilities to produce methane along with other heavy gases with hydrogen as the by-product.

It's completely naivé to imagine methane will cease, it's as naivé as people thinking logging will cease, or gold mining will cease, or cars will cease, or planes will cease. It's just used as an argument in renewables / climate debate because the public is oblivious to what methane is needed to produce other than burning it as a fuel.

btw. The formula for methane is CH4, there is no O in there!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 05, 2023, 07:39:07 pm
When methane burns in air there’s a fair bit of O available to produce carbon dioxide. In fact, AFAIK it won’t burn unless oxygen is present.

If blue hydrogen is going to be a little niche market, why bother with it? Why would industry be willing to invest considerable funds into improving the technology and setting up the infrastructure if it won’t be scaled up dramatically? Just look at the blue hydrogen facility in the Latrobe Valley. It will need to implement a large scale CCS to deal with the greenhouse gas emissions and that is a Herculean undertaking. The hydrogen will then be transported to the Port of Hastings where another facility will convert it into liquid ammonia, whereupon it will be shipped offshore in special pressurised tankers. And you’re telling me that will just be a little operation which won’t create large quantities of methane which, when aggregated with similar facilities around the world, won’t make much of dent in methane demand?

In particular, it’s odd that you would bang on about how hydrogen should be widely used in transportation as well as fuelling power-hungry industries but then claim byproducts would be minimal because hydrogen won’t be a major source of energy.

Investment in blue hydrogen doesn’t seem to me to be a transient operation which will melt away when green hydrogen comes on line. It might if we were talking about some global operation where optimal environmental outcomes were more important than making money. But there’s no global operation. Operators of blue hydrogen facilities will defend their patch to the death (of the planet, if necessary). The Latrobe Valley plant is there because of access to coal and presumably disused mines which might be sites for carbon capture. Neither is of any benefit to a plant that will create green hydrogen. Instead, green hydrogen plants would be sited close to water. That blue hydrogen plant would just be another disused building. It’s not too hard to imagine blue hydrogen operators would try to kill off competition from green hydrogen operators. That would involve trying to tie up government funding and challenging the scientific and business cases presented by those new entrants. That’s the same sort of thing that we see the fossil fuel industry doing already. And in the case of the Latrobe Valley plant, the Victorian Government (no matter whether it’s Labor or Liberal) may side with the blue hydrogen suppliers as they monetise Victoria’s coal supplies and create employment in an area that depended on coal-fired power generation.

I

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 06, 2023, 07:49:16 am
When methane burns in air there’s a fair bit of O available to produce carbon dioxide. In fact, AFAIK it won’t burn unless oxygen is present
So are you volunteering to light it, you'd do that just to prove your point?

I think the most common way methane reduces in the environment without some biology being involved is catalysis, and the end result is mostly methanol, acetic acid and a little CO2 on the side. But I hear you correctly noting, methanol and acetic acid are heavier than air, well at least that is how the scientists think Titan exists!

btw., Having had a quick chat with some boffins this morning to confirm my suspicions, I can relay that the catalysis of methane occurs in an anaerobic environment, forming methanol, formic acid, acetic acid, all useful chemicals used in industry and food production often with hydrogen as a by-product.

Scientists and engineers busy designing process that mimic what nature has been doing for millions of years, producing waste hydrogen that burns up in the air producing water, evil bastards aren't they causing all those floods!

Quote
anaerobic
1.
relating to or requiring an absence of free oxygen.
"anaerobic bacteria"
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 06, 2023, 09:53:58 am
I’m guessing you know that the garbage dumps collecting methane propose to burn it as fuel to provide power. As you know, that’s an aerobic process.
Quote
Aerobic
 relating to, involving, or requiring free oxygen.
"simple aerobic bacteria"

And it’s wonderful that science has methods to break down methane. But real world economics has a way of spoiling things. What would be the cost of catalysis on the industrial scale needed to deal with the methane produced in the production of blue hydrogen? And again, would there be sufficient demand for this new industrial scale production of end products aggregated across the world? Surely the latter question impacts the former as sale of the end products would underpin viability. And how much power would be required for the large-scale catalysis process? After all, the fact blue hydrogen requires less power to produce than green hydrogen production requires is one of its selling points. But when we add in the power required to process the byproducts, maybe that pro turns into a con. Maybe blue hydrogen would then be a con?

By the way, science also gives us the ability to split carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen. In theory, we could deal with this byproduct of blue hydrogen production. But the power required to achieve this in order to produce power makes it impractical. So let’s focus on practicality rather than theory.

Maybe rather than trying to cut the Gordion knot by searching for ways to minimise the impact of greenhouse byproducts, we should simplify the problem by producing green hydrogen. As you’ve already noted, hydrogen will only meet a tiny fraction of the world’s energy needs, so let’s not get tied up in knots over it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 06, 2023, 10:13:47 am
Here’s an interesting idea to cut emissions in the steel industry without needing to create new plants:
https://www.freethink.com/energy/decarbonizing-steel (https://www.freethink.com/energy/decarbonizing-steel).

As noted in the article, it might work on paper but it hasn’t been tested in the real world. Still, an 88% reduction in emissions is very interesting.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 06, 2023, 11:28:03 am
And it’s wonderful that science has methods to break down methane. But real world economics has a way of spoiling things. What would be the cost of catalysis on the industrial scale needed to deal with the methane produced in the production of blue hydrogen?
It's not a new process or new venture, the conversion of methane is already being done, it's just that the source is mining, and it turns out methane is so easy to capture farmers can already do it and get a return, so I doubt big industry will have a problem.

Your point about cracking CO2 is correct, which is why it's much more efficient to crack methane (CH4), methane conversion / cracking is a much lower energy process, the catalysts are longer lasting and it produces more hydrogen. Although there has been progress in developing new catalysts and reusable MOF frameworks to capture CO2 from industrial emissions and release it in a controlled manner. In particular a new sand based filtering solution that absorbs CO2 and then releases it when gently heated. The gentle heating is key, there are many solutions to absorb CO2 but they require a massive amount of energy to release it. fwiw., It has to be released to make economic sense, so that the catalyst / framework isn't single use, so enters CCS into the debate again.

Really the renewables alarmism around methane is displaced, it's a finger in the dyke moment, and the renewables sector would be better focussed on cleaning up their own act and sourcing rare earths and precious metals from sustainable reservoirs. (There is a reason why people like Twiggy Forrest and BHP are so keen on Solar PV, Solar PV needs the stuff they dig!)

At one of the facilities I visit we had to get past protestors barricading the gates because the plant emitted nitrogen. Nitrogen is also a greenhouse gas and makes up roughly 70% of our atmosphere. The protest was pointless, the nitrogen used in most industrial processing comes out of the air, what isn't converted to something like nitrides, fertiliser or explosives goes back to the air. We consume nitrogen we don't make it, but it's so abundant humans will barely make a dent in the ecospheres supply by the time the Sun consumes the Earth!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Professer E on February 06, 2023, 12:35:03 pm
LP is correct.  REE mining, and particularly processing, is close to the dirtiest activity on the plant.  Horrendous for the environment.  The tailings from processing alone rival waste from a nuclear facility.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 06, 2023, 02:09:15 pm
LP is correct.  REE mining, and particularly processing, is close to the dirtiest activity on the plant.  Horrendous for the environment.  The tailings from processing alone rival waste from a nuclear facility.
The public protest against mining, boost Solar PV, and oppose nuclear.

But the Rare Earth mining produces as much radioactive waste as coal mining or burning. For radiation it's not the volume of waste that is the problem, but the fact that it gets concentrated by the refining process.

The volume of other waste becomes an issue because rare earths are well, ............ rare, DuH! There are projects now trying to develop uses for much of the waste, but the economics of the effort looks grim.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 07, 2023, 11:42:28 am
Research shows oil field flaring emits nearly five times more methane than expected (https://www.npr.org/2022/09/29/1125894105/oil-field-flaring-methane-report), npr.org.

Quote
Flares, or fires lit at oil and gas wells to burn off excess gas that cannot be transported and sold, are a common sight at oil fields around the world. Some are even visible from space.

But a new study published in the journal Science Thursday found that the process is not eliminating nearly as much methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide, as assumed.

"Our findings indicate that flaring is responsible for five times more methane entering the atmosphere than we previously thought," says Genevieve Plant, lead author and assistant research scientist at the University of Michigan.

Methane, the main component of natural gas, is also a byproduct of oil drilling. Flaring is a way to convert unsellable gas into compounds such as carbon dioxide, which still cause global warming but are less harmful in the near-term. Flares are designed to eliminate at least 98% of the methane that passes through them, and that is the default amount used when estimating the emissions they create.

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/09/29/ap486259156356-bf8462146b820a20b86ad556e0db4b442d18c6fd-s1600-c85.webp)

Well, well, well … very interesting. Who would have thought that excess methane would be burnt off? Aerobically.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 07, 2023, 01:10:44 pm
Research shows oil field flaring emits nearly five times more methane than expected (https://www.npr.org/2022/09/29/1125894105/oil-field-flaring-methane-report), npr.org.
Yep, they are theoretically supposed to be able to convert 98% of methane, but in practise many wells only convert 91%, that is the 'nearly 5x' in the discussion heading. Of course we could say they were operating at 92.8% efficiency, but that doesn't suit the politics of the article.

And of course none of this has to do with methane conversion to hydrogen or other useful products, but the reporters happily draw the inference.

Yet another example of an alarmingly deceptive and highly political report from the boosters of the renewables sector! ;)

I find the NPR report particularly troubling, because I'm a big supporter of NPR's media content, and I expect them to be impartial and rigorous in reporting and broadcasting, they are supposed to expose deceptions not create them! I suppose I have to accept organisations like NPR and our own ABC broadcasting more sensationalised opinion and doing less reporting that would historically be the case!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 07, 2023, 01:58:46 pm
 :D

No comment on your surprise that excess methane would be burnt? I thought you’d said that was nonsense because there’s no O in methane and it would be catalysed anaerobically …

No comment on the fact that more methane is produced as a byproduct than can be transported and sold? Don’t they know they’re literally burning money as there’s an infinite demand for the end products of catalysis which can be sold for a King’s ransom?

It’s interesting that you talk so admiringly about the conversion of 92.8% of the methane. How efficient, you say. But you don’t worry about the fact that this conversion produces carbon dioxide, one of the most problematic greenhouse gases. And the 7.2% that isn’t burnt is methane that’s released into the atmosphere and methane is just as troublesome as carbon dioxide. Sometimes efficiency isn’t such a wonderful thing. Ruthless regimes have unfortunately been very efficient over the years. Let’s focus on what is being achieved rather than how efficiently it’s being done.

Maybe any approval of blue hydrogen plants should be conditioned on those plants suspending production as soon as they are producing excess methane. Rather than producing methane as a set percentage of the blue hydrogen produced while trying to maximise blue hydrogen production (and then scrambling to get rid of it all), hydrogen production should depend on how much methane can be sensibly catalysed. That would throw a spanner in the works. And it wouldn’t be a bad idea to condition approval on a demonstrated ability to bury carbon dioxide in a successfully operating large-scale CCS system rather than accepting optimistic promises or buying carbon credits. I’m betting that would be another spanner in the works.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 07, 2023, 03:33:06 pm
:D

No comment on your surprise that excess methane would be burnt? I thought you’d said that was nonsense because there’s no O in methane and it would be catalysed anaerobically …
We were not talking about traditional mining or it's practises, those existing practises of fossil fuel industry have little relevance to the future procedures of blue or green hydrogen production, only a Solar PV apparatchik would try to build that very deceptive link!

You are coming across as a bit desperate to paint a high tech future industry as dirty, almost like you are financially invested in a competitor.

The lady doth protest too much!

Given you are so au fait with the subject, care to comment on the anaerobic conversion of CO2 while you are at it?

As for CCS, it's inevitable that something like that occurs, because even manufacturing the basic components of solar panels, wind turbines or wave energy generates CO2 or other greenhouse gases as a by-product. They have to do something to be genuinely labelled zero carbon, or else one day someone will use NPR's accounting practises on them, and claim they are infinitely overbudget on zero! Maybe they will use some of those dodgy carbon offsets! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 07, 2023, 04:04:47 pm
Yep, I’m a green energy magnate just waiting to have my Bond villain moment.

And of course blue hydrogen producers would never prioritise profits over environmental outcomes. Sure, they might be trying to exploit fossil fuels like traditional fossil fuel producers but they’re the good guys, right?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 08, 2023, 08:08:01 am
Yep, I’m a green energy magnate just waiting to have my Bond villain moment.

And of course blue hydrogen producers would never prioritise profits over environmental outcomes. Sure, they might be trying to exploit fossil fuels like traditional fossil fuel producers but they’re the good guys, right?
In case people hadn't noticed it's basically the same subset of people and companies selling SolarPV and Wind energy as well as Hydrogen, they aren't idiots, they have one leg each side of the fence ready to jump. So in one context they seem to be inclined to be labelled saints, and when it doesn't suit they apparently become sinners.

The only genuinely stupid act in the energy and environment debate is lambasting all low carbon dioxide alternatives by boosting one specific solution, it's utter stupidity, and obvious beyond doubt only a mix of technologies can rapidly deliver a sustainable solution. Opposing good technologies because they are not the selected bet is idiotic, that bet is a corporate behaviour not science.

btw., The Hydrogen economy has been on the cards for almost three decades, it's not an overnight alternative spruiked to save mining in it's dying moments. And it's the technology of choice for industrial and commercial solutions to many energy issues, as promoted by both the head of CSIRO and the Chief Scientist since the 1990s and still promoted to this day.

Australia missed a massive opportunity to become the world leader in nuclear due to domestic politics, repeating the same mistakes we made in the early years of radio astronomy and space launches, will it do the same on hydrogen? I fear so, and I suspect the collapse of the Forrest / Cannon-Brookes venture is the start of this same set of errors.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 10, 2023, 11:13:14 am
Promising news on the wind turbine front:  A Danish wind turbine giant has just discovered how to recycle all rotor blades (https://canadatoday.news/ca/a-danish-wind-turbine-giant-has-just-discovered-how-to-recycle-all-rotor-blades-264213/), CanadaToday.

The assertion is that Vestas has discovered a chemical treatment that can break down the epoxy in the blades and this enables the components to be reused, keeping them out of landfill. Even better, this should also work in other industries where epoxy is a problem.

On the battery front, there seem to be multiple advances occurring every day.

MIT Discovery Could Unlock a Safer and Lighter Lithium Battery (https://www.techspot.com/news/96467-low-cost-solar-cells-reach-new-efficiency-record.html), SciTechDaily.

A new lithium-air battery design promises unprecedented energy density (https://www.techspot.com/news/97537-new-lithium-air-battery-design-promises-unprecedented-energy.html), Techspot.

Both developments would produce lighter, denser and safer batteries as they’d avoid using liquid electrolytes and would resist the development of dendrites. The MIT discovery also seems to avoid efficiency loss which will mean less waste.

There’s even improvements in dye-sensitised solar cells (DSCs) which are cheap, transparent, and flexible. They can be affixed to windows which would work well with city office buildings and greenhouses. They could also power laptops or phones just using ambient light.

Low-cost 'transparent' solar cells reach new efficiency record, electricity-generating windows incoming? (https://www.techspot.com/news/96467-low-cost-solar-cells-reach-new-efficiency-record.html), Techspot.

This sort of progress is why I don’t buy into hand-wringing over current problems concerning renewable energy production. The technology is improving quickly which can’t be said of the fossil fuel industry.



Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 10, 2023, 11:25:45 am
And how about this Aussie development? The University of NSW in conjunction with a Japanese Uni have “identified a new type of positive electrode material that could lead to incredibly durable solid-state batteries.”

Quote
In lab testing, a 300mAh battery outfitted with the new positive electrode material experienced zero degradation over hundreds of recharge cycles.

Neeraj Sharma, an associate professor from UNSW, said the absence of capacity fading over 400 cycles clearly indicated superior performance of the material compared to those used in conventional all-solid-state cells with layered materials.

The finding also has the potential to drastically reduce the overall cost of batteries, Sharma added, which could be a key cog in the development of advanced electric vehicles.

Many, including BMW engineer Simon Erhard, believe lithium-ion batteries have reached their maximum potential and that solid-state batteries will eventually take over as the industry standard. And it's not just EVs that could benefit from the absence of capacity fade.

Solid-state battery breakthrough could greatly extend longevity, Techspot (https://www.techspot.com/news/96974-solid-state-battery-breakthrough-could-greatly-extend-longevity.html)

Keeping up with all these developments would be a full-time job.


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 10, 2023, 01:18:52 pm
And how about this Aussie development? The University of NSW in conjunction with a Japanese Uni have “identified a new type of positive electrode material that could lead to incredibly durable solid-state batteries.”

Solid-state battery breakthrough could greatly extend longevity, Techspot (https://www.techspot.com/news/96974-solid-state-battery-breakthrough-could-greatly-extend-longevity.html)

Keeping up with all these developments would be a full-time job.
Huge potential if it works, but the electrodes are only part of the issue with solid state batteries, at this stage the discharge / recharge cycles are much much lower than conventional electrolytes.

A big plus for solid state is that it's likely to be far less flammable / explosive if shorted or damaged.

For static batteries, for generation storage, buildings and homes, flow batteries are still likely to become king.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 10, 2023, 01:27:54 pm
Promising news on the wind turbine front:  A Danish wind turbine giant has just discovered how to recycle all rotor blades (https://canadatoday.news/ca/a-danish-wind-turbine-giant-has-just-discovered-how-to-recycle-all-rotor-blades-264213/), CanadaToday.

The assertion is that Vestas has discovered a chemical treatment that can break down the epoxy in the blades and this enables the components to be reused, keeping them out of landfill. Even better, this should also work in other industries where epoxy is a problem.
I read something about this a couple of weeks ago, it's a spin off of a technology that also being touted for disassembly and recycling of mobile phones as well as other polymer based products or adhesives. For example of they switch to the right type of adhesive for phones or SolarPV they can have them self-disassemble.

There is a catch though, it basically uses a sodium hydroxide derivative, which itself is a very very nasty chemical(paint stripper), so when the process chemicals are exhausted you have recovered one lot of waste only to generate a whole lot of another. The claim is the new waste isn't waste but can be used for other industrial process, but the more I read the more it became a pass the waste(parcel) scenario. Some poor bastard at the end of the food chain was left holding the bag for every previous process!

There is another group that has developed a way to reduce polymer and epoxy components to solids and gas using solar powered furnaces that process polymers / plastics in inert atmospheres. This is also being touted as a solution, but in reality they have only ever processed materials in batches of grams.

In some respect the world has gone crazy, the engineers retire these turbine blades long before they are done, in much the same way they scrap aircraft before they crash. It doesn't make sense, the turbines sit mostly in abandoned or rural spaces populated by a few sheep or cattle, they should be just leaving them in place until they fail, but instead they replace them at regular intervals and store the old blades as waste for future recycling. It's a bit bizarre, but easy to understand when you see the big dollars involved for making and programmed maintenance of a wind turbine!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 08:04:38 am
This is the truth dressed up in a great cover, you won't read much about it, electrics vehicles are barely a decade old and have on average travelled a fraction the miles of a combustion engine.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/the-big-reuse-25-mwh-of-ex-car-batteries-go-on-the-grid-in-california/

Imagine if instead of 5% of cars EVs made up 85% of the traffic?

Where's that in the carbon budget?

btw., I'm all for this re-use of batteries, but my own preference is distributed rather than monolithic, the plan here in OZ is to put them on power poles down your street to help load balance and also offer some localised black-out protection. Sort of a public UPS. Putting them local also eliminates or minimises grid loss for SolarPV feed in.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 08:10:50 am
And for the greenies, I've seen the following first-hand, I've actually been to Borneo training people for advanced manufacturing, this is an uncomfortable truth for the local Nimbys who spend all day protecting the planet by driving to protests in their Green EVs and self-organising via their smart phones.

If it's got a battery in it, this is how you get it, and not just the nickel!
https://www.wired.com/story/workers-are-dying-in-the-ev-industrys-tainted-city/
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 11:29:15 am
Seems to me that the story is a fairly common tale of business going to war with attempts to restrain environmental damage and harm to workers. Those attempts are commonly rubbished as “red tape” and freedom means that companies can do what they want in order to increase profits. I wonder how powerful unions are in Indonesia. I’m thinking they’re impotent if they even exist.

The same dilemma taints the clothing industry (sweatshops), coffee and chocolate production (child and slave labour), and even in homes around Australia where stone benchtops are installed at the cost of silicosis being inflicted on installers. In Dubai, simply building sports stadiums cost thousands of lives where migrant workers were considered expendable and treated as slaves.

And I don’t think mining and fossil fuel industries are any more responsible when they operate in countries where they can override regulation. I’m thinking Dubai is no more caring about workers in the oil industry than it was when it was preparing for the World Cup.

That said, as with other industries where attempts are being made to limit harms inflicted by essentially lawless operators in the supply chain, the same should occur in the EV industry. The same problem will arise as in other industries: manufacturers who refuse to deal with unethical producers will be undercut by manufacturers who only care about obtaining the cheapest materials.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 11:37:46 am
Coal’s Quicker Exit Means Australia Needs More Energy Spending, Bloomberg (https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/coal-s-quicker-exit-means-australia-needs-more-energy-spending-1.1886088)
Quote
“Urgent and ongoing investment in renewable energy, long-duration storage and transmission is needed to reliably meet demand from Australian homes and businesses,” AEMO Chief Executive Officer Daniel Westerman said in a statement.

Utilities are rushing to shutter aging coal operations citing the eroding viability of the plants amid competition from cheaper solar and wind. Origin Energy Ltd. last year moved up the retirement of the Eraring Power Station in New South Wales by seven years, while AGL Energy Ltd. advanced its closure plans by a decade. The companies intend to add new renewable energy generation and battery storage as a replacement.

Investment in large-scale renewable energy projects in Australia jumped 145% in 2022 to about $5.9 billion, with around 5 gigawatts of solar and wind installed, BloombergNEF analysts including Tushna Antia said in a January report. Spending is forecast to remain strong with at least a further 3.7 gigawatts of projects expected to reach financial close this year, the analysts said.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 12:00:33 pm
Seems to me that the story is a fairly common tale of business going to war with attempts to restrain environmental damage and harm to workers.
Yet focussing on those miners and companies would be missing the point.

The Green Endorsed triple baseline accounting companies buy the raw materials for the EVs, Batteries and SolarPVs of those Indonesian mining operations, all the while claiming that the products they make(EVs, Batteries and SolarPVs) are responsibly sourced and environmentally sound. It's bogus economics because the true cost isn't included, the true cost is NIMBY!

Why am I not surprised to find the opinion of mining, or the opposition to it, changes subject to the perspective?

Good luck to those resource companies but beware the hand that feeds you, you are about to be strung up as the enemy the moment a better alternative is found and you'll be accused of a deception as part of the process. Ignorance is bliss! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 12:05:17 pm
Focussing on the miners and companies is the point. That doesn’t change whether the end user is an EV manufacturer or not. And it doesn’t change whether the mine is a nickel mine or an open-cut coal mine. Proper regulation should be imposed which protects workers and the environment.

Does the mining of nickel and lithium in Australia kill people at the same rate as nickel mining in Indonesia? If not, why not?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 12:09:10 pm
Focussing on the miners and companies is the point. That doesn’t change whether the end user is an EV manufacturer or not.
If you want us to all be driving EVs soon, in a low carbon gas free cooking era, mining can't ever end!

Production of the raw materials needs to ramp up almost 1000% to make the claimed targets.

The only way to control the market is to vote with your feet, and the SolarPV and EV makers won't do that, because the product cost goes through the roof and all of a sudden it's Greeness is offset by not being so cheap, or vice versa! They claim the high ground at the moment, Greenest and Cheapest, but it's bogus accounting because there is a cost NIMBY.

Don't mention the war!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 12:33:40 pm
I see you didn’t bother to say whether the employment and environmental practices of mineral mining in Australia are better than those in Indonesia. I’m guessing that means they are.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 01:56:58 pm
I see you didn’t bother to say whether the employment and environmental practices of mineral mining in Australia are better than those in Indonesia. I’m guessing that means they are.
Actually, for the direct employees there is not much difference, but for the subcontractors and residents in the surrounding areas it is very different.

There is no EA, R or C in Indonesia, if you get a permit to mine the officials are probably already crooked and on the books, and you'll be long long gone before somebody has to step in and make restitution, and even then it only happens if there is another project they want to start. I was going to mention in the earlier post, I've been to Gempol not just in passing but visiting the site as part of my regular visit to Surabaya, but I thought you might step in on a tangent so I didn't mention it!

But in reality is that really much worse than here, were you can be an identified crook and still avoid responsibility while you keep trading, at least there the operation was halted?

My focus isn't so much about highlighting what is being done wrong, and I'm certainly not opposed to it being fixed, but I have a big problem with all the finger-pointing that comes from entities are not really any better! The finger-pointing is actually an enabler for the crooks and profiteers.

The reality of Lithium EV Batteries and SolarPV Panels for example, when we visit factories in SE Asia with representatives from the EU or Australia, we will tour a pristine showroom like facility, that looks immaculate and high tech, white tiled and stainless steel, rust and dust free, like a Bond Villain's Swiss Mountain Lair completely transparent. But the reality is the bulk of the product they will receive is going to come from a sweatshop 10km down the road that has no address, no air-conditioning and dirt floors that they will never see, they know that, but after the tour they accept plausible deniability, pat each other on the back and head back to Alps for the opening of the winter season!

I rally and rally for change, but it's never going to happen, I can see the only way for SE Asia to get out of this mire is through wealth creation. But here in NIMBYVILLE, we are addicted to our low cost EVs and square kilometres of SolarPV, after all that smog is never crossing our border is it?

There was real irony when Australia's recycling shipments were rejected recently for being too dirty, what was in the containers was probably cleaner than the compound they were being unloaded in! I visited one of the recycling enterprises a few years back, it's basically a tip built across a river, and you just have to know where all that recycling gets rinsed, and they are not employing engineers! Probably that is where that recycled plastic dashboard panelling comes from for your EV.

I accept such is life, but why should either side be able to hide in plain sight?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 03:14:29 pm
I agree that there should be complete accounting for externalities so attention can be paid to ameliorating production chains. But expanding the base for green technology is important as we have a chicken and egg problem. Delaying a switch to green fuel for cars means the infrastructure won’t improve and that will be a disincentive to switch over. That would gladden the hearts of fossil fuel advocates everywhere. As I’ve noted previously, battery technology is improving dramatically. Far from wanting to allow EV manufacturers to hide dirty links in their supply chain, a full accounting of externalities will spur R&D into cleaner battery technology.

It’s a bit like carbon offsets and the definitions of renewable energy which can be used to distort efforts to battle climate change. I still can’t understand how the EU was allowed to get away with including wood-fired power plants in its contribution to that fight. Make sure all externalities are included and shell games are eliminated. That might be a big problem for blue hydrogen which relies on optimistic assurances that greenhouse gases will disappear as if by magic.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 05:01:37 pm
I agree that there should be complete accounting for externalities so attention can be paid to ameliorating production chains. But expanding the base for green technology is important as we have a chicken and egg problem. Delaying a switch to green fuel for cars means the infrastructure won’t improve and that will be a disincentive to switch over. That would gladden the hearts of fossil fuel advocates everywhere. As I’ve noted previously, battery technology is improving dramatically. Far from wanting to allow EV manufacturers to hide dirty links in their supply chain, a full accounting of externalities will spur R&D into cleaner battery technology.

It’s a bit like carbon offsets and the definitions of renewable energy which can be used to distort efforts to battle climate change. I still can’t understand how the EU was allowed to get away with including wood-fired power plants in its contribution to that fight. Make sure all externalities are included and shell games are eliminated. That might be a big problem for blue hydrogen which relies on optimistic assurances that greenhouse gases will disappear as if by magic.
What is referred to as Hydrogen of any hue is already a very very green fuel, the short term problem is that it's initial resource sourcing emit the same filthy wastes as those raw materials being ejected from Borneo mines in the search of a better battery or SolarPV. So by comparison why is a Lithium battery or a SolarPV considered green by comparison, the sourcing for those sectors are some of the filthiest industries on the planet, perhaps even worse than the Newcastle Blue Hydrogen given the emissions in Borneo occur in obscurity?

The contradiction is obvious, although many will try to spin thinly veiled excuses in the detail, the dishonest appraisal of one industry versus another exposes a political motive not a green motive.

If the world isn't doing everything it can possibly do everywhere all at once, it isn't doing anything at all!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 05:12:45 pm
All the Indonesian mines have to do is promise that they’ll bury the pollutants in the ground or convert them into chemicals which can be used by industry in unlimited quantities and the problem goes away, no? It doesn’t matter if they can do as promised. Once everything is rolling along, regulators and governments will be pressured to fudge the data so the magic happens.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 22, 2023, 05:14:17 pm
All the Indonesian mines have to do is promise that they’ll bury the pollutants in the ground or convert them into chemicals which can be used by industry in unlimited quantities and the problem goes away, no?
Yes, bury them for now, it is a bit like all that recycling of lithium batteries, wind turbine blades and SolarPV, .................. eventually after we dig them up! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 22, 2023, 10:15:29 pm
Republicans in the US ‘Battery Belt’ Embrace Biden’s Climate Spending, The Guardian. (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/22/climate-spending-republican-states-clean-energy-funding)

Good luck to Republicans hoping to win back Georgia’s 2 Senate seats. Looks like the incumbents can claim credit for bringing home the bacon to their constituents.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 10:16:19 am
Another development which illustrates the folly of trying to use the current state of battery technology against EV cars.

Leclanché reports breakthrough in environmentally-friendly battery production, Electrive.com. (https://www.electrive.com/2023/01/18/leclanche-reports-breakthrough-in-environmentally-friendly-battery-production/)

Quote
Swiss battery manufacturer Leclanché says it has made a breakthrough in the environmentally friendly production of modern G/NMCA cells. Leclanché is able to reduce the cobalt content in NMCA electrodes from 20 to five per cent in an environmentally friendly water-based process.

In the process, Leclanché completely eliminates the use of the highly toxic organic solvents (NMP, short for N-methylpyrrolidone) that are otherwise common in the production process. According to Leclanché, the new G/NMCA cells offer a 20 per cent higher energy density compared to conventional NMC cells – with the same size, weight and very good performance. The “G” stands for the graphite in the anode, NMCA for a cathode based on nickel-manganese-cobalt-aluminium oxide.

One thing is clear: NMCA cathodes based on water-based binders are easier to dispose of and recyclable. The newly developed G/NMCA cell is said to have a nickel content of around 90 per cent, which increases the energy density and allows the cobalt content to be significantly reduced by 15 per cent. At the same time, according to the company, it offers a longer service life, high cycle stability and good chargeability.

Thanks to the high volume density and high cycle stability, the new cells are said to be particularly well suited for “electric cars as well as heavy-duty applications such as ships, buses and trucks” . Leclanché’s new G/NMCA cells are expected to be available on the market in 2024.

Company representatives also emphasise in the release, however, that the real breakthrough lies in the production that is now possible. “With the water-based production of the high-capacity NMCA cathodes, we have reached a decisive milestone in lithium-ion technology,” says Hilmi Buqa, Vice President R&D at Leclanché. “Until now, producing them using environmentally friendly processes was considered impossible. But, now we have mastered the process.”

Leclanché has been using aqueous binders in its battery production for many years. Among other things, because the previous production processes based on these binders did not allow for such high energy densities as were required for automotive use, Leclanché batteries have so far mainly been used in commercial vehicles and in the shipping industry for hybrid ferries or electric ships.

By the way, with the water-based process, Leclanché can already dispense with energy-intensive processes for drying, flashing off and recycling the solvents. Energy consumption is therefore said to be ten to 30 per cent lower.

It’s encouraging that this announcement comes from a company that is already producing batteries for commercial vehicles and ships and this gives some credibility to the claim that the new batteries will be released in 2024.

This won’t be the last improvement to the production process. But it underscores that criticisms of the current technology and production processes might be buried more quickly than CCS can bury carbon dioxide.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 11:43:25 am
It's a bit early to call these advances solutions, while I'm all for the science and the technology, the modern trend to crow early is a bit disturbing.

They crow early because they need funding, this stuff costs big dollars, and like the COVID vaccines they can't be funded by private investment, it has to be government funding of some sort. So the sell, sell, sell the developments, even if it's only still lab scale.

But everyone knows this, even the Hydrogen naysayers in the battery industry use this repeated trend to talk down hydrogen by labelling it as a "new technology", that is despite much of the hydrogen economy R&D being older than Wind, SolarPV, LIoN or even Modern EVs!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 12:08:05 pm
Or maybe it’s like the blue hydrogen industry claiming CCS and catalysis are solutions to the problematic emissions and byproducts. A bit too early for that, no?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 23, 2023, 12:18:07 pm
I don't believe technology, whether old or new, will help much in dealing with the climate crisis. It is precisely our unchecked technological wizardry that got us into this mess in the first place. Trying to come with new technologies to solve the problems created by older technologies might make some minor improvements, and that's about it IMO.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 12:49:51 pm
I agree there’s a risk that science will be used as a fig leaf for continued pollution. It’s a bit like the tobacco industry introducing filters and menthol (or getting behind vapes) to suggest they’re making tobacco safer to use. I wouldn’t want the fossil fuel industry to use CCS and other means to justify doing business as usual.

On the other hand, there have been some scientific advances or interventions that did help to make things safer. Banning CFCs has helped to replenish the ozone layer and introducing unleaded petrol has reduced the developmental damage inflicted by lead.

But the scientific consensus appears to be that even eliminating emissions totally wouldn’t allow us to stop the rise in global temperatures (and unless science can offer alternatives, that’s not going to happen). We need to eliminate carbon dioxide that’s already in the atmosphere and only science can make that happen. There are currently DAC (Direct Air Capture) projects that are trying to scale up those efforts: see this (https://www.eenews.net/articles/competition-heats-up-for-u-s-direct-air-capture-program/) for example.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 23, 2023, 01:07:50 pm
I agree there’s a risk that science will be used as a fig leaf for continued pollution. It’s a bit like the tobacco industry introducing filters and menthol (or getting behind vapes) to suggest they’re making tobacco safer to use. I wouldn’t want the fossil fuel industry to use CCS and other means to justify doing business as usual.

On the other hand, there have been some scientific advances or interventions that did help to make things safer. Banning CFCs has helped to replenish the ozone layer and introducing unleaded petrol has reduced the developmental damage inflicted by lead.

But the scientific consensus appears to be that even eliminating emissions totally wouldn’t allow us to stop the rise in global temperatures (and unless science can offer alternatives, that’s not going to happen). We need to eliminate carbon dioxide that’s already in the atmosphere and only science can make that happen. There are currently DAC (Direct Air Capture) projects that are trying to scale up those efforts: see this (https://www.eenews.net/articles/competition-heats-up-for-u-s-direct-air-capture-program/) for example.


Science and technology are both morally neutral enterprises that serve centres of power. Scientists aren't pure either.

I guess the point I was making is that the fundamentally unsustainable lifestyle of those in the developed world in not really tied to technological choice. Whilst it makes some difference, I'm not sure that solar panels on the roof or everybody driving EV's will help all that much. All the alternatives to traditional energy sources have their own problems, and environmental issues that need to be sorted out. I would argue the climate and environmental issues are locked right into the very fabric and essence of the way we live.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 01:12:29 pm
But unless the clickers or zombies take over, or some other apocalyptic event happens, that’s not going to change. Let’s hope science can help us avoid disaster.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 01:13:49 pm
Or maybe it’s like the blue hydrogen industry claiming CCS and catalysis are solutions to the problematic emissions and byproducts. A bit too early for that, no?
In terms of Hydrogen production I think you mean electrolysis which is the process of making hydrogen from seawater, the catalysis part comes into capturing, converting or reducing waste products like the catalytic converters in cars. Catalysis can be used as part of the electrolysis process to make hydrogen production from seawater even more efficient. Once hydrogen is produce catalysis can be used to convert the hydrogen back in electricity producing only water as a by-product.

btw., If hydrogen is so evil, why are "Green" enterprises like Forrest and Cannon-Brookes proposing to use it as a form of energy storage for a project like SunCable. Is it only green when a Greenie find a use for it? This goes to the heart of the doubts held by people like @PaulP , the big problem is people, no matter what the technology is capable of delivering.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 01:19:39 pm
Pretty much any big corporate or energy enterprise, be it fossil fuel, renewables, low carbon or no carbon, the behaviour and spin pretty much makes Trump look like a moderate.

"That mine is filthy and destroying the environment, it's not the mine supplying our SolarPV or battery factory is it?"

"We only source from "the good mines", ban all mines, except our "good ones", leave us with our clean mine!

"We've a monopoly on clean mining, only mines that supply us are Clean!"
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 01:39:11 pm
No, I’m thinking blue hydrogen might be one of those ideas that makes Paul wary. Imagine using coal to produce hydrogen and then trying to find a way to deal with the carbon dioxide and methane produced so it can be spruiked as a solution to climate change. And the process suffers from significant energy loss. Not an ideal energy solution. By the way, doesn’t Twiggy do a bit of mining?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 01:41:48 pm
No, I’m thinking blue hydrogen might be one of those ideas that makes Paul wary. Imagine using coal to produce hydrogen and then trying to find a way to deal with the carbon dioxide and methane produced so it can be spruiked as a solution to climate change. And the process suffers from significant energy loss. Not an ideal energy solution. By the way, doesn’t Twiggy do a bit of mining?
You seem to like to forget the formula for methane, and also it seems the concept of anaerobic.

I sincerely doubt there will be much methane emitted buy a hydrogen production facility, in fact they might even be keen to find some! ;D
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 01:43:19 pm
You seem to have forgotten that oil and gas producers have been burning off methane for yonks, aerobically.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 01:47:08 pm
All those warehouses full of old SolarPV, soon to be labelled toxic waste, full of silicates, the new asbestos apparently! ;)

@Mav Will you help stop the production, they are destroying the planet and killing innocent tradespeople?

Yet in comparison to battery production, almost spotlessly clean! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 02:01:04 pm
I’ll be just as active in that area as you will be in ensuring CCS is 100% efficient and all methane is catalysed. How are you going to do that?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on February 23, 2023, 02:44:10 pm
Although I've contributed SFA to this thread I must say that I'm learning and enjoying the contributions from Wingman MAV and the Spotted One. Keep 'em rollin' chaps... informative stuff.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 03:20:50 pm
I’ll be just as active in that area as you will be in ensuring CCS is 100% efficient and all methane is catalysed. How are you going to do that?
I'm 100% active on all fronts, and I will never claim a process is without flaws or faults, I betting on a little bit from all solutions and not trying to just pick a winner that makes me feel good.
( That is making me feel good as long as I ignore what lies beneath! )

Next thing you'll be telling me we are re-planting forests to reduce methane emissions! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 03:44:37 pm
I think it’s better just to reduce the amount of methane we produce, isn’t it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 03:47:02 pm
I think it’s better just to reduce the amount of methane we produce, isn’t it?
There is R&D happening at several locations right now trying to characterise how much methane a typical tropical forests will emit, and the viability of capturing it, as it could well be more profitable to harvest the forests methane emissions than fell the trees or clear the forest, .................... but only in a hydrogen economy.

As for reducing methane emissions, we should do it but in the wider picture it's a drop in the ocean, we actually manufacture methane for use on other chemical processes, even if we captured all we emit or flare off we'd still need to make it.

Our priorities should be CO2 reduction and CO2 scrubbing, most leading institutes have long accept CO2 reductions even to zero is no longer enough, the latest figures we now have show we must start mining/scrubbing CO2 from the atmosphere! Oddly of natures alleged solution "trees" are not going to do it, grass is a better option be it the land or sea version. But they accept now after zero we will head towards atmospheric engineering as the next step, that is CO2 scrubbing, by some means.

A feedback loop has been identified, the better and cleaner we make the environment, the more everything breeds like rabbits including people! Such a pain, people are again the problem, give them a paradise and they will f@#$ and f@#$ it up!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 04:02:34 pm
If you electrolyse seawater to produce hydrogen, as a by-product you get pretty much every critical element needed for advanced economies in some trace level. Luckily by volume, the sea has more than enough to pretty much last the human race long after it's made a home in space.

Batteries and SolarPV consume trace elements before they create any energy, so they need a long payback period.

As a energy storage medium, the energy density is the energy in watts per kilogram of weight. By that factor hydrogen has an energy density of 35,000 watts per kilogram, while lithium-ion batteries have an density of just over 200 watts per kilogram. That is why Cannon-Brookes and Twiggy Forest want to store energy as hydrogen, to be converted back to power via fuel cells, it's a no brainer. As a clean energy option it's so far ahead there isn't even a competition, and there wouldn't be a competition without the barrage of publicly subsidised marketing by Battery and SolarPV, industries using your tax dollars to sell you the EV / Battery con!

I've even read cons where they try to paint the generation and transportation of hydrogen as a negative compared to batteries getting efficient power from power plants delivered by cable. But of course they ignore that your EV carries around a tonne of battery whether it's fully charged or nearly discharge, while a hydrogen tank gets lighter as the fuel level gets lower. Actually, when compared on all terms even given the lower efficiency of a fuel cells versus a battery, they break about even on efficiency. However in a static application, after the initial recovering of all the overheads, hydrogen for something like bulk storage of excess grid energy is miles ahead!

Then there is the bogus claim green hydrogen will use all the water. Hydrogen is produced from water at a ratio of about 9:1, even though hydrogen has almost 200x the energy density of a LIoN battery we still need 2 to 3 GT(Gigatonnes ) of hydrogen every year. So naysayers quote that figure and claim the worlds water will be used up, except that 2 -3GT / per year equates 20 - 30 GT of water, which is less than 2ppm of the atmospheres available water, actually closer to 1.5ppm. Assuming no further technological advancement, it'll take humans at least 250k years to use 1/2 the planets freely accessible water, of course we can't expect people to accept that in 250k years time, vandals that we are! And we won't learn jack-shizen in the intervening period given we are naturally luddites, and we will of course be grounded by space debris, which is a bust because just one of those big frozen asteroids which float freely around the solar system can apparently power us at our current level of demand for hundreds of years. btw.

By freely accessible water I'm not talking about water, oceans, crust et., all, that total amount of water would be 1,388,464,566,929 GT! :o Even if our estimates are out by a factor of 100 or even 1000, supply and demand is irrelevant!

But we will dry out the air, except Greenland is currently losing 280 GT of ice annually, Antarctica lost 120 GT of ice just last year, roughly 4x what we would need to hydrogen fuel the planet!

I can imagine the protests now, "Save the asteroids!"
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 04:21:09 pm
Gee, I want to get into producing methane! It doesn’t matter how much you produce, you’ll always be able to sell it. It’s like having a golden goose!

By the way, green hydrogen is produced using electrolysis to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen, no coal, carbon dioxide or methane involved.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 23, 2023, 04:36:43 pm
Gee, I want to get into producing methane! It doesn’t matter how much you produce, you’ll always be able to sell it. It’s like having a golden goose!

By the way, green hydrogen is produced using electrolysis to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen, no coal, carbon dioxide or methane involved.
Don't forget the chemical formula, the basics of nature and physics matter! ;)

H2O vs CH4

You can go from methane to hydrogen and carbon, there is no CO2 in that part of the process. The carbon you can thermally processed into graphene, the graphene becomes electronics and part of all sorts of other need materials like carbon fibre, the green alternative to steel! ;)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 04:43:21 pm
As always, the devil’s in the details. What’s the energy penalty involved in that process? Scientists can and do produce antimatter, for instance. The only problem is that it costs more than 60 trillion dollars to produce a gram. Theoretical rather than practical processes don’t impress me much.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 05:00:18 pm
I guess I could go down the same path by simply suggesting we could obtain all the rare metals we need for battery production by towing mineral-rich asteroids to the moon and processing them there. Job done. All problems solved.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2023, 05:51:06 pm
It doesn’t appear that pyrolysis is being used at scale to split methane into hydrogen and carbon. Given that, your warnings about using blue sky announcements are extremely pertinent to attempts to construct an economic case for employing it at scale.

Here’s an example of a company channeling Trump - only we can do it:

‘We will make zero-CO2 hydrogen from natural gas so cheaply we could give it away for free’, rechargenews.com (https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/-we-will-make-zero-co2-hydrogen-from-natural-gas-so-cheaply-we-could-give-it-away-for-free-/2-1-1075224).

Of course, the company boasts of having a secret sauce that can overcome crippling problems in producing “Turquoise Hydrogen”. Until they prove they can scale up, we only have their word for it.

But the spokesman does at least acknowledge a nagging problem that you just wave off, LP:
Quote
The limits of the H Quest process
It would be easy to assume that H Quest’s process of making CO2-free hydrogen from natural gas could revolutionise the fast-growing H2 sector, that it would eliminate any need to produce blue hydrogen and allow a hydrogen economy to develop at speed, but the technology does have two small drawbacks.

One is that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas that often leaks upstream (see panel below), and the other is that there is a limit to the size of H Quest’s market, even if it is potentially large. For instance, the carbon black market, which the company wants to target first, requires 14 million tonnes of the stuff each year.

“What we're limited by is the market of the carbon co-product,” says Skoptsov. “We’re making three times as much carbon products [by weight] as hydrogen products. So we have to balance those. That’s the fundamental problem we have to solve, but we are already working on new use cases for our materials.”

Remember that if this process aims to produce as much hydrogen as possible, then there will be 3 times as much carbon to sell off. Without resorting to the magic pudding approach you favour, LP, there’s a fairly stark choice. Either scale down the amount of hydrogen produced so that the byproduct can be sold off at a decent market price or crash the market and destroy the economic case for that process. Perhaps part of the carbon produced could simply be buried to maintain prices but there are political and perhaps legal issues with that. Would there need to be something like OPEC to ensure some producers don’t flood the market and would that attract scrutiny from corporate regulators who would regard it as oligopolistic price-fixing?

Anyway, just saying something is scientifically possible doesn’t mean it is economically viable. Let’s wait until we see a working model. After all, you’re quick to doubt that breakthroughs in battery technology will make it into real world production processes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2023, 12:57:06 pm
There is always an attempt by naysayers to imply some link between carbon(a solid) and carbon dioxide(a gas).

But the thing is even if produced in excess, the solid carbon can be literally ploughed into the ground for use as a soil conditioner, like biochar, displacing some of the rather nasty nitrates fertilizers that are used now. Sure it might not deliver as much energy, but functionally it will be a low cost by-product of energy generation.

Of course, not being done as scale, is different to never tested at scale. Many of the hydrogen economy technologies were tested at scale long ago, but  back in a era where the fossil fuel damage to the environment bore no cost, hydrogen was discarded as uneconomic. Of course back then the very same fate came to SolarPV or Wind, which has only gained traction in recent times only through subsidies, which is a political issue.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 24, 2023, 12:59:27 pm
Ordered solar for the house, feel happy about it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2023, 01:04:53 pm
Ordered solar for the house, feel happy about it.
Yep, and you should feel good about it, it's the right thing to do.

@Gointocarlton my debate is not an opposition to SolarPV, Wind or any other low carbon or no carbon energy. I'm debating the need for these industries to actually be what they claim to be, spend more time getting better collectively, instead of spending all day cutting each other's throat for short term profit!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2023, 01:13:00 pm
The Wind industry will tell you SolarPV is a filthy industry that consumes perfectly good land which could can be used for agribusiness.

The SolarPV industry will claim Wind generates lots of unrecyclable waste, kills rare birds, is a hazard for shipping and causes infrasound harm to nearby residents.

Neither Wind nor SolarPV comment on the battery industry because they need batteries or they are literally dead and buried being unrecyclable.

The Hydrogen industry will tell you batteries are filthy, short lived and consume rare resources.

Battery manufacturers will tell you hydrogen is made from coal, is highly inefficient and will consume all our drinking water.

The fossil fuel industry presents a conglomeration of all these accusations.

They all sprout lies of sorts to line their own pockets, claiming one or the other has some sort of high ground is political not technical decision!

The truth is many of the accusations have some substance in a certain limited frame of reference, which is usually a privileged perspective that is chosen to make one technology look good and the other look bad. When you stack the global benefits and costs up against each other, there is barely a difference between them other than in the marketing spin!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2023, 01:25:28 pm
I had to laugh today, as we often get dragged in these discussions at work, I sat through an extended rant from a born again EV apparatchik who spent what seemed like hours telling us how hydrogen vehicles / transport could never work. It was probably just a few minutes.

At the end he justified his position by telling us about his past experiences, back when he converted his 4WD to LPG! ::)

Back in the old OPEC fuel crisis days, Aussies turned to LPG for a large chunk of the vehicle network in the space of just 2 or 3 years, some of us might still be driving LPG vehicles!

If we think we can wait while 85% of the world's vehicle network converts to EV, then well and good, but it's not happening in a decade, or two decades or even three decades without a huge consumption of resources.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 24, 2023, 02:41:56 pm
I don’t want a bait and switch. If “Turquoise Hydrogen” is economically viable to produce, let’s see a scaled up version of it working. Otherwise, we know the drill:
1. Sorry, the Turquoise bit won’t work, but now we have the infrastructure set up we might as well produce Blue Hydrogen.
2. Sorry again, but the squints have let us down on CCS and catalysis, so it makes sense to release the carbon dioxide and methane gases into the atmosphere but we’ll buy a few bogus carbon credits to keep everybody happy.

Once the producers get approvals and governments commit to subsidies and guaranteed purchases of hydrogen, we all know they’ll be allowed to rewrite the deals to make them work. We’ve seen governments refuse to hold contractors to time constraints and default provisions in rail deals and tollway constructions. Those sorts of investments are too big to fail.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 24, 2023, 03:14:26 pm
Once the producers get approvals and governments commit to subsidies and guaranteed purchases of hydrogen, we all know they’ll be allowed to rewrite the deals to make them work.
True, but then you must be fairly upset about the SolarPV industry filling warehouses full of never to be recycled redundant failed panels that didn't last the expected ROI lifetime!

And you must be furious about the SolarPV people getting massive grants, widely supported by a public expecting generous feed tariffs from providers that evaporated as the installations grew!

Now, as the range of older(old by EV standards) EVs falloff a cliff, we are starting to see old EV batteries pile up, batteries built on subsidies and sold at a premium. 10 years becomes 5 years, 300km becomes 210km, a 4hr charge is now overnight, and recycling seems to evaporate or become repurpose.

Same coin, different side, not a spec of high ground to be obtained.

Fiscal or legal or marketing smokescreens, as deadly as any desert mirage!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 24, 2023, 04:54:43 pm
So you want to parlay deals made at the start of the push for renewable power to jump start the industry into a legitimate expectation that Turquoise Hydrogen producers should be allowed to set up speculative ventures on the government dime? Interesting position you have there …

I would have thought setting up power plants that may end up emitting copious greenhouse gases is not what we need right now. Let someone set up that sort of power plant overseas and prove that it works as intended before we invest in them over here.

We’ve already seen a blue hydrogen setting up in the Latrobe Valley and it’s releasing greenhouse gases. There’s a pie-in-the-sky promise that there’ll be a CCS system operating around 2030 and until then the plant will rely on the dubious carbon credits system to make it “green”.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 25, 2023, 08:35:11 pm
Some serious scientists exposing the myths around the anti-nuclear power debate, a long video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIQE-EUpMa8
Very clever people presenting these comments.

But note the ROI debate hinges on the longevity of SolarPV and Wind, the figures assume 10-15 year life for SolarPV at full performance, when the figures are adjusted for real world longevity and degrading performance over time the differences swiftly diminish. For example, if 10% of SolarPV panels fail within 5 years, which is about the current average, the difference to nuclear is halved. Even worse, many people are ignorant that their SolarPV is failing or degraded and keep operating an installation long after part of it should have been replaced.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 25, 2023, 08:55:46 pm
I've been watching Sabine for a couple of years. She's very good IMO.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 10:30:10 am
But note the ROI debate hinges on the longevity of SolarPV and Wind, the figures assume 10-15 year life for SolarPV at full performance, when the figures are adjusted for real world longevity and degrading performance over time the differences swiftly diminish. For example, if 10% of SolarPV panels fail within 5 years, which is about the current average, the difference to nuclear is halved. Even worse, many people are ignorant that their SolarPV is failing or degraded and keep operating an installation long after part of it should have been replaced.
This is your Achilles’ heel. For the purposes of making comparisons, you regard technology as static. Even worse, you assume the performance of devices built 15-20 years ago reflect the performance of similar devices manufactured now and there’s no acknowledgement that they’ll be even better in the future.

To a degree, that’s understandable. Rosy predictions can prove to be very optimistic in retrospect, so it’s fair enough to point out that similar claims made in the past fell short. But that doesn’t excuse discounting improvements. When comparing mature power sources with rapidly improving technologies, that’s misleading. Do you agree that solar panels made today are more efficient and reliable than those made 15-20 years ago?

Certainly, that’s not a mistake the markets make. The problem for nuclear is that decisions are made not only on calculations of current RoIs but on what they’ll be as technology improves. Nuclear proponents have to show that an investment today will reap sufficient returns in years 20-70; in other words, will the investment be worthwhile if renewable energy available in that window is cheap and plentiful. It’s not as though nuclear technology will improve so dramatically in the future that the nuclear industry should be seen as developing rather than mature (save of course for nuclear fusion which would be a game changer).

Here’s a potential breakthrough in perovskite solar cells that may increase the longevity and efficiency of solar panels while reducing their costs and carbon footprint:
Once seen as fleeting, a new solar tech proves its lasting power, Princeton University. (https://www.princeton.edu/news/2022/06/29/once-seen-fleeting-new-solar-tech-proves-its-lasting-power)

Whether it ends up a winner isn’t the point: there is so much promising research into different approaches to renewable energy production and storage that it would be incredible if there aren’t big improvements made in the coming decades.

As a separate matter, when considering an assumption of 10-15 year’s longevity, you have to make sure you aren’t double counting. How do you know this figure doesn’t already factor in the early failure of some panels or their deterioration over time? Given claimed longevity of 20-25 years, there has already been a significant discount applied.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on February 26, 2023, 11:08:44 am
I can't say I'd be too thrilled living close to a nuclear power plant, however irrational that may seem.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 26, 2023, 11:14:17 am
I can't say I'd be too thrilled living close to a nuclear power plant, however irrational that may seem.
Thats the beauty of Australia, no shortage of land/locations.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 26, 2023, 11:26:27 am
Thats the beauty of Australia, no shortage of land/locations.

Not really.

The demand for water means that nuclear plants would have to be on the coast and subject to a range of risk factors that coastal locations present.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 26, 2023, 11:42:15 am
Not really.

The demand for water means that nuclear plants would have to be on the coast and subject to a range of risk factors that coastal locations present.
Yep, and people think it's one big reactor tucked away in the middle of nowhere. It will be a multiple/network of reactors to share the load for safety reasons.
Also it will probably be foreign owned given the start up costs so look forward to paying more and having to pay for new infrastructure....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 12:47:17 pm
This is your Achilles’ heel. For the purposes of making comparisons, you regard technology as static. Even worse, you assume the performance of devices built 15-20 years ago reflect the performance of similar devices manufactured now and there’s no acknowledgement that they’ll be even better in the future.
I work in the industry that makes the machinery to produce printable electronics and SolarPV, using modern techniques, not even the cutting edge stuff makes it to 10 years with better than 10% failure rate.

The best available technology costs more than a OLED TV per square meter, a typical 6kW system installation using those panels would cost AUD$60K, which is why they are available to the general public and the panel is usually reserved for applications like space where longevity limits mission length. But even it fails down here on the surface, as it cannot be made 100% perfect as the surface has micropores that allow oxygen in, this causes the layers to oxidise and harden as which time they develop micro-stress fracturing from thermal cycling.

Oddly, arguing that SolarPV and WInd will advance seems to reinforce the argument for nuclear, because most of the examples of non-external failure are for technologies that are 70 years old! So thanks for the boost, nuclear has advanced so so much in just the last 20 years it's almost unrecognisable from nuclear of even the 60s or 70s let alone the 40s and 50s designs!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 12:53:05 pm
And your evidence for saying the 10-15 year assumption has omitted the factors you put forward is …?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 12:59:32 pm
Not really.

The demand for water means that nuclear plants would have to be on the coast and subject to a range of risk factors that coastal locations present.
You need to update your knowledge base, water isn't part of the cooling system of modern nuclear because at high temperature and velocity water becomes hyper corrosive.

Old archaic designs fundamentally spend a huge chunk of there time managing and disposing of sacrificial anodes / cathodes to prevent the cooling water eroding critical components, coal and gas have the very same issue. For reference hot fast flowing water is even more corrosive than the molten salts being used.

But of course you must know this, because if your claims that modern thermal power generation needs lots of water were true then Solar Thermal would also be dead and buried here is Oz, but because it fundamentally uses the same molten salt technology harness heat energy as modern thorium or modular nuclear reactor designs it is viable.

Modern modular reactors are self contained and fully enclosed, they are referred to as nuclear batteries and are water free, much like the devices on aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, space probes, etc., etc., the a standalone unit that can be swapped in and out of service with a standard crane. There are several projects running right now to improve the weight and mobility, so they can be dropped by helicopter or heavy lift aircraft into disaster zones restoring power in hours or days instead of weeks or months. The only difference between that emergency operation and suburban energy is scale, like a single battery versus a bank of batteries.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 01:07:32 pm
And your evidence for saying the 10-15 year assumption has omitted the factors you put forward is …?
It's in the very video I linked to, and also in the reports that Sabine links to on her own websites.

For example, the anti-nuclear brigade assert nuclear energy is carbon expensive over the lifetime of the plant, but they cap the lifetime of the plant at 30 years, even the old technologies in use now are 50, 60 or 70 years old, most of the carbon in the nuclear plant emissions in is construction, go from 30 to 40 years is a 25% reduction, go from 30 to 60 years and it's 50%.

The same groups issue reports that stretch the MTBF lifetime of SolarPV to 10 - 15 years, which is bogus because although panels might still be working in 15 years they won't be at 100% efficiency any more, they will typically be at 80% or less which in terms of a carbon budget is the same as a 20% failure rate. It's odd for you to question that given you also boost the use of old batteries, batteries that are barely a decade old being repurposed in the desert as grid storage, because they have degraded efficiency.

At the moment SolarPV makes up about 2% to 3% of global supply, wind is about 5% but it's difficult to put a figure on a highly variable form of generation, they have good and bad months subject to the weather. The idea we can use these technologies alone to get to the 80% zero carbon renewable figure needed to meet targets in the timeframe required is a completely absurd joke, like betting on one horse to win every race on the planet!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 01:28:38 pm
It's in the very video I linked to, and also in the reports that Sabine links to on her own websites.
Are you saying that the video and reports state that the failure rate and deterioration have not been taken into account at all? If so, please provide the relevant quotes.

It's odd for you to question that given you also boost the use of old batteries, batteries that are barely a decade old being repurposed in the desert as grid storage, because they have degraded efficiency.
Please refer me to those boosts. I can’t recall them.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 01:50:28 pm
Interesting approach to the work of Sabine Hossenfelder and Elina Charatsidou, “some serious scientists and very smart people exposing the myths around the anti-nuclear power debate.”

They are brilliant scientists when they say things that favour nuclear power but strangely they’re pretty crap at understanding reports and statistics which undermine the economic viability of nuclear power. If only they could see what LP sees. So, pro-nuclear comments good, anti-nuclear comments bad. Got it!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on February 26, 2023, 02:08:32 pm
Not really.

The demand for water means that nuclear plants would have to be on the coast and subject to a range of risk factors that coastal locations present.

1. Lucky we have the one of the biggest coastlines of any country.
2. As LP suggests, thats not quite right anyway.

On top of that, our population density is so concentrated, that we can build multiple without affecting any major cities.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 26, 2023, 03:01:41 pm
You need to update your knowledge base, water isn't part of the cooling system of modern nuclear because at high temperature and velocity water becomes hyper corrosive.

Old archaic designs fundamentally spend a huge chunk of there time managing and disposing of sacrificial anodes / cathodes to prevent the cooling water eroding critical components, coal and gas have the very same issue. For reference hot fast flowing water is even more corrosive than the molten salts being used.

But of course you must know this, because if your claims that modern thermal power generation needs lots of water were true then Solar Thermal would also be dead and buried here is Oz, but because it fundamentally uses the same molten salt technology harness heat energy as modern thorium or modular nuclear reactor designs it is viable.

Modern modular reactors are self contained and fully enclosed, they are referred to as nuclear batteries and are water free, much like the devices on aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, space probes, etc., etc., the a standalone unit that can be swapped in and out of service with a standard crane. There are several projects running right now to improve the weight and mobility, so they can be dropped by helicopter or heavy lift aircraft into disaster zones restoring power in hours or days instead of weeks or months. The only difference between that emergency operation and suburban energy is scale, like a single battery versus a bank of batteries.
re: New Less water reactors....They are smaller lightweight reactors that produce less power so you need more of them, they also use different heat transfer mediums like Liquid metal, Helium and Molten Salt so you need to allow for supply of those items to your reactor as well as the supply of water you need to create your steam. They are really designed to be produced in factories modular style and then transported for 3rd world countries/remote areas who lack water and money...
Australia would be building them around the coast  near water supply and building them in safe areas to offset rising sea levels. You would expect Desalination and probably Hydrogen Production to also feature as part of any new builds and the latter of course feeds into greener energy solutions.
I'm in favour of nuclear energy providing its done right, not on the cheap and is Fully Australian owned, once foreign ownership is involved you will have issues with safety, maintenance and rising costs.
As Krud points out our population density is concentrated so I see no reason why we cant have a successful Nuclear energy setup other than lack of finances and finding a  Government willing to take the plunge and risk the backlash of protest votes that come with it..
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 03:02:29 pm
Oh dear, here’s another video from Sabine Hossenfelder, a serious scientist and very smart person exposing the myths around the hydrogen economy debate:

Hydrogen won’t save us: here’s why. (https://www.youtube.com/c/sabinehossenfelder)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 26, 2023, 03:49:26 pm
You need to update your knowledge base, water isn't part of the cooling system of modern nuclear because at high temperature and velocity water becomes hyper corrosive.

Old archaic designs fundamentally spend a huge chunk of there time managing and disposing of sacrificial anodes / cathodes to prevent the cooling water eroding critical components, coal and gas have the very same issue. For reference hot fast flowing water is even more corrosive than the molten salts being used.

But of course you must know this, because if your claims that modern thermal power generation needs lots of water were true then Solar Thermal would also be dead and buried here is Oz, but because it fundamentally uses the same molten salt technology harness heat energy as modern thorium or modular nuclear reactor designs it is viable.

Modern modular reactors are self contained and fully enclosed, they are referred to as nuclear batteries and are water free, much like the devices on aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, space probes, etc., etc., the a standalone unit that can be swapped in and out of service with a standard crane. There are several projects running right now to improve the weight and mobility, so they can be dropped by helicopter or heavy lift aircraft into disaster zones restoring power in hours or days instead of weeks or months. The only difference between that emergency operation and suburban energy is scale, like a single battery versus a bank of batteries.

You've been reading too much sci fi LP  :)

Most planned Small Modular Reactors will be water-cooled as it's the cheapest and most reliable form of cooling.  The two Russian SMRs in operation are located on a floating power station for cooling purposes.

Nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers use highly purified sea water for cooling.  The Russians used lead-bismuth for cooling but its corrosive and radiotoxic properties were too problematic. One US nuclear submarine was sodium-cooled but its reactor was replaced with a conventional pressurised water reactor within 12 months.

Up to 12 SMRs have to be clustered together to provide equivalent power to a conventional nuclear or fossil fuel power plant.  The advantage is that SMRs don't have to be constructed on site but can be assembled from modular components shipped to installation sites.  As SMRs weigh 500-700 tonnes, I think we're going to need a bigger helicopter  ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on February 26, 2023, 05:14:16 pm
Its interesting.   Everyone is happy to weigh up the pros of any technology and when the cons are raised its pointed to down the track but history has shown us what happens with any technology.

At some point the almighty dollar dictates that we stop progressing tech and start making the equivalent tech for less dollars using flakey statistics to prop up that decision.

Longevity isn't in the equation because you don't sell more of anything make it last a long time ergo, economies of scale dictate that it needs to be cheap and disposable rather than quality with longevity.

Same applies to everything we buy and use.  People would rather bright shiny new than reliable and that is the root cause of the majority of our ecological woes.

You'd make a greater impact making everyone consume less but no one ever got rich that way.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 10:20:20 pm
Oh dear, here’s another video from Sabine Hossenfelder, a serious scientist and very smart person exposing the myths around the hydrogen economy debate:

Hydrogen won’t save us: here’s why. (https://www.youtube.com/c/sabinehossenfelder)
No one technology can save the planet, the whole point Sabine makes in multiple videos.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 10:27:32 pm
You've been reading too much sci fi LP  :)

Most planned Small Modular Reactors will be water-cooled as it's the cheapest and most reliable form of cooling.  The two Russian SMRs in operation are located on a floating power station for cooling purposes.

Nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers use highly purified sea water for cooling.  The Russians used lead-bismuth for cooling but its corrosive and radiotoxic properties were too problematic. One US nuclear submarine was sodium-cooled but its reactor was replaced with a conventional pressurised water reactor within 12 months.

Up to 12 SMRs have to be clustered together to provide equivalent power to a conventional nuclear or fossil fuel power plant.  The advantage is that SMRs don't have to be constructed on site but can be assembled from modular components shipped to installation sites.  As SMRs weigh 500-700 tonnes, I think we're going to need a bigger helicopter  ::)
You are being quite selective in your choice of examples and language, is it deliberate or accidentally naive?

An SMR of the type you refer to is the 1980s version, originally proposed by GE, although few were built, the are several companies developing fast breeder reactors of that type to use U238.

What I'm referring to are modular thorium or pebble bed reactors, and they are the size of a small house at the biggest, and as explained in the video, further the generation currently being developed is about the size of the semi-trailor. Which is why they are sometimes referred to as nuclear batteries.

We are discussing 2020 technology, and you are telling us it's no good with 1980s example designs.

The world has moved on beyond 1980 and it is not science fiction! ;).
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 10:31:11 pm
Australia would be building them around the coast  near water supply and building them in safe areas to offset rising sea levels. You would expect Desalination and probably Hydrogen Production to also feature as part of any new builds and the latter of course feeds into greener energy solutions.
If we just constrain the debate to Australia and it's situation this is 100% correct and feasible, in fact Australia is crazy not build fast breeder reactors and desalination plants hand in hand. Desalination plants have to be run 24x7 to be reliable, GW nuclear plants need a continuous base load to that they don't have to shutdown and restart, so the technologies are like peas in a pod.

Further, both desalination plants and reactors make a nice array of rare elements as by-products that are required for a whole host of advanced manufacturing techniques and medicine. At the moment ANSTO (Australain Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) basically runs it's reactors to produce these necessary materials, which are used for many things diverse as treating cancer or manufacturing advanced sensors. They also use the associated neutron sources for advanced science and engineering techniques.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 26, 2023, 11:00:09 pm
You are being quite selective in your choice of examples and language, is it deliberate or accidentally naive?

An SMR of the type you refer to is the 1980s version, originally proposed by GE, although few were built, the are several companies developing fast breeder reactors of that type to use U238.

What I'm referring to are modular thorium or pebble bed reactors, and they are the size of a small house at the biggest, and as explained in the video, further the generation currently being developed is about the size of the semi-trailor. Which is why they are sometimes referred to as nuclear batteries.

We are discussing 2020 technology, and you are telling us it's no good with 1980s example designs.

The world has moved on beyond 1980 and it is not science fiction! ;).

You make me laugh LP.

How many SMRs are in operation?

When was the first SMR approved for construction in the USA?

When are they going to build a helicopter large enough to transport a reactor?

And what about the nuclear power plants used in state of the art submarines?  There’s water cooled and nothing else.

Of course there are other options for cooling SMRs but water is the most economical and reliable method.  No SMRs using other cooling mediums have been approved or progressed beyond initial planning.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 26, 2023, 11:02:21 pm
It looks as though you can’t show that the ROI report that Sabine relied upon didn’t take into account the factors you raised. Nor can you point to the boosting you claim I engaged in. Were you being deliberately or accidentally misleading?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 11:06:58 pm
DJC, you have to give up on only debating this at the high power end of the SMR range, your discussing systems that are the upper limit of SMR, I'm talking about systems designed to power 2000 to 3000 homes, 1/300th the size of the SMRs you are referring to, and not a drop of water being used in any of the designs.

As for Mav he lists a video about hydrogen that he claims debunks hydrogen, but if I recall correctly Sabine's hydrogen video from a few months back actually states that hydrogen works with nuclear hand in glove, she actually makes that point twice, when she describes pink hydrogen and again when she summarise the future options. Which is consistent with her position that the solution to the world's problem must be as diverse as the problem.

Horses for courses, you don't construct a building made out of steel, glass, bricks and timber by just hiring a carpenter.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 11:36:05 pm
The current state of play in modular reactor designs democratises energy by making it modular and regional. A lot of opposition exists because it to some degree segments the grid, and in my opinion that is probably it's biggest negative.

But a small 10MW modular reactor as currently proposed/designed can power a country town, 2000 to 300 homes, and will take up about the same land footprint as a triple car garage. A SolarPV plant to generate the same energy needs to cover roughly a square kilometer, and that is not including the grid storage area needed to feed the town if the sun is below 20° (morning and night), you won't hear that mentioned by the Greenies.

These small devices are not the SMR some refer to, which are typically small PWR systems(Pressurised Water Reactors) and are typically taken to be above the 300MW range, generally the definition of SMR covers a range of devices from about 6MW to 900MW subject to which authority you source your reports from. Some regions use terms like vSMR for very small or uSMR for micro, we have to keep in mind these v or u terms are relative to large PWR systems that generate Gigawatts and are hundreds or thousands of times larger. But even so these worries are somewhat archaic, with many new designs proposed to slash the cost and modularise the construction of even GW scale systems.

The idea of these very small or micro reactors  gets a lot of opposition, but the opposition is mostly funded by the fossil fuel industry and GE, it's quite ironic for Greenies to indirectly become pawns of GE. GE and one or two other multinationals effectively have monopolies on the building of large nuclear reactors.

But this is typical of the anti-nuclear movement, and Sabine actually highlights that very well in her video, which is why she is such a good source of balanced information.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 11:38:42 pm
The axis of evil for SolarPV or Wind, and for fossil fuel industry for that matter, is a triad of solutions built around modern nuclear, desalination and hydrogen.

In isolation we are weak, together we are strong.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 26, 2023, 11:48:42 pm
When those old batteries were repurposed saving the environment, one assumes that in some case the EV itself was repurposed with a new battery, that almost doubled the carbon footprint of those vehicles that endured. If they didn't endure then the break even point was never obtained, was the EV carbon footprint recalcuated?

Will it make it's next break even target before it's junked?

I wonder what those replacement batteries cost, what became of the cost per kilometre/kilowatt?

Was the environmental impact of the 2nd battery refactored into the original environmental impact figures?

Just a handful of batteries, nothing much to worry about, yet enough to have the project described as a burgeoning industry! :o

So so so many holes to fill, better change the subject!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 27, 2023, 01:14:39 am
As for Mav he lists a video about hydrogen that he claims debunks hydrogen, but if I recall correctly Sabine's hydrogen video from a few months back actually states that hydrogen works with nuclear hand in glove, she actually makes that point twice, when she describes pink hydrogen and again when she summarise the future options. Which is consistent with her position that the solution to the world's problem must be as diverse as the problem.
That’s hilarious 😂 You didn’t watch the video, did you LP …

It reminds me of TV shows where a student tries to BS his way through a book review when he didn’t do the reading!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 27, 2023, 01:30:07 am
DJC, you have to give up on only debating this at the high power end of the SMR range, your discussing systems that are the upper limit of SMR, I'm talking about systems designed to power 2000 to 3000 homes, 1/300th the size of the SMRs you are referring to, and not a drop of water being used in any of the designs.

As for Mav he lists a video about hydrogen that he claims debunks hydrogen, but if I recall correctly Sabine's hydrogen video from a few months back actually states that hydrogen works with nuclear hand in glove, she actually makes that point twice, when she describes pink hydrogen and again when she summarise the future options. Which is consistent with her position that the solution to the world's problem must be as diverse as the problem.

Horses for courses, you don't construct a building made out of steel, glass, bricks and timber by just hiring a carpenter.

So you can't answer the questions I posed LP?

I'll make it easy for you; how are the reactors on the latest Virginia and Astute class nuclear powered submarines cooled?

Answer: They have pressurised water reactors (PWRs).

But you said:

Quote
Modern modular reactors are self contained and fully enclosed, they are referred to as nuclear batteries and are water free, much like the devices on aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, space probes, etc., etc.,


You're just making stuff up.

Look up Professor Alfredo Caro of The George Washington University.  He recently wrote, "“There are plenty of technologies now—50 different models around the world. Once one of them gets into a financially viable equation, that will capture the entire market and I think that this will happen with water-cooled small reactors.”

Of course, that's only his expert opinion ... but the fact that the only SMR design certified by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is water-cooled lends weight to his opinion. That design was certified in January this year.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 27, 2023, 11:18:35 am
I'll make it easy for you; how are the reactors on the latest Virginia and Astute class nuclear powered submarines cooled?
You keep presenting examples of designs from the 80s and 90s and using them to talk down current and future technologies.

It's like using the steam powered horseless carriage as a reason not to have an EV.

By the way though the Virginia class nicely supports my longevity argument, they are expected to remain in service until 2070 from first launch in the early 2000s. But how can that be, the Renewable Apparatchik's tell use nuclear power plants have to be decommissioned after an average service life of 30 years? Is it because they want to compound all the environment overheads into 3 decades to make the emissions overhead twice the real world case?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 27, 2023, 11:25:20 am
Sabine present a rational case based on historically available technologies, and that is a reasonable position to take as she doesn't want to be drawn into a debate about future capabilities. It's a bit like not planning the use of a space telescope until it gets into space.

But even so she still arrives at the fundamental conclusion that no one technology can deliver the targets we need, which is either an invisible or uncomfortable truth for some it seems! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on February 27, 2023, 12:43:15 pm
You keep presenting examples of designs from the 80s and 90s and using them to talk down current and future technologies.

It's like using the steam powered horseless carriage as a reason not to have an EV.

By the way though the Virginia class nicely supports my longevity argument, they are expected to remain in service until 2070 from first launch in the early 2000s. But how can that be, the Renewable Apparatchik's tell use nuclear power plants have to be decommissioned after an average service life of 30 years? Is it because they want to compound all the environment overheads into 3 decades to make the emissions overhead twice the real world case?

You keep saying that LP but you're wrong.

The Rolls Royce PWR3 used in the latest Astute class submarine draws heavily on the S9G reactor used in Virginia class submarines.  While the first Rolls Royce PWRs date to the mid 1980s, the PWR3 reactor is a 21st century design.  S9G stands for Submarine, 9th generation core General Electric and the first S9G reactor went into service this century.  As mentioned previously, the PWR3 and S9G reactors are water cooled.  All nuclear powered vessels currently in service are water cooled.

Nuclear submarine reactors produce around 200 megawatts (thermal), and that contributes to the longevity of the fuel.  SMRs are expected to produce around 300 megawatts (electric or 1000 megawatts thermal). While there's a world of difference between reactors used to produce steam for propulsion and those used to generate electricity, the prototype Russian SMRs are based on nuclear icebreaker reactors that produce 30 megawatts (electric).  It makes sense, in terms of safety, energy requirements and economics for nuclear submarine reactors to have full life cores.  The same doesn't apply to conventional nuclear power plants or SMRs.  SMRs may have longer fuel cycles than conventional nuclear power plants but will still require regular refuelling.

SMRs are future terchnology with only three prototypes in operation (one is gas cooled).  However, the literature is quite clear on the likelihood of successful designs being water cooled and the need for clusters of SMRs to meet both grid demand and for modular construction to be cost effective.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 27, 2023, 01:21:07 pm
You keep saying that LP but you're wrong.

The Rolls Royce PWR3 used in the latest Astute class submarine draws heavily on the S9G reactor used in Virginia class submarines.  While the first Rolls Royce PWRs date to the mid 1980s, the PWR3 reactor is a 21st century design.
They are not a "21st century" design, they are a 21st century update to a 1980s design.

Given it's Airshow week maybe an aircraft analogy, not matter how many 2000s era James Hirds you pack into a DC-3 it'll still be a 1940s aircraft!

I can add Android to the dash of a FC Holden, but it's still an FC!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on February 28, 2023, 01:58:23 pm
Interesting arguments about solar geoengineering: dispersing particulates into the upper atmosphere to deflect a fraction of the sunlight.

Block the sun, save the planet?, Politico. (https://www.politico.com/newsletters/power-switch/2023/02/27/block-the-sun-save-the-planet-00082767)

The Wapo reports that the US intelligence agencies and national security officials have workshopped how to deal with geopolitical tensions where one country may push ahead with measures that detrimentally affect neighbours.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 28, 2023, 03:15:19 pm
Interesting arguments about solar geoengineering: dispersing particulates into the upper atmosphere to deflect a fraction of the sunlight.

Block the sun, save the planet?, Politico. (https://www.politico.com/newsletters/power-switch/2023/02/27/block-the-sun-save-the-planet-00082767)

The Wapo reports that the US intelligence agencies and national security officials have workshopped how to deal with geopolitical tensions where one country may push ahead with measures that detrimentally affect neighbours.
Unfortunately, because of such slow progress, these geo-engineering solutions are being seriously considered by some locations. But it's like pollution and won't respect borders! btw., Many of them are already under small scale test, by small scale it still means large enough to affect a major region like a state.

The most likely so far is going to be seeding the oceans.

To me this is a step too far, it's like tapping a metronome and expecting it to settle into a new regular beat, but we should take heed of the mysterious effects of synchronicity and chaos. Such is the biosphere.

For the fun of it, this example uses a resonant surface to accelerate the effect, but given enough time this can even happen when devices are spread over surfaces as diverse as rough or sandy terrain or a concrete floor. The very last one to sync and how that seems to happen by brute force is the most surprising
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v5eBf2KwF8
People are perhaps a little ambitious if they think they can safely fiddle with things on a global scale.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 01:45:35 pm
Revealed: 1,000 super-emitting methane leaks risk triggering climate tipping points, The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/06/revealed-1000-super-emitting-methane-leaks-risk-triggering-climate-tipping-points).

Why are there so many super-emitting methane leaks when methane can apparently through catalysis be more profitable than having a goose laying golden eggs?

Thank heavens the blue hydrogen producers will be generating enough methane to address our global shortage of methane.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:17:51 pm
There is some irony in the photos they used for that article, a cow walking past a oil rig!

Human methane emissions versus natural methane emissions, that would be an interesting bit of research to wrap up.

Anybody notice the hydrogen garbage truck launched in Melbourne yesterday, they'll make there own green hydrogen from the solar power on the roof of the plant that builds the trucks using high performance solar powered catalysts.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 04:27:35 pm
I wonder if the fossil fuel industry will fund research into human and animal emissions of carbon dioxide versus emissions related to fossil fuels. No doubt the former are the real problem.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:29:52 pm
Redcycle, what a tragedy, proof bloody minded environmentalists can do as much harm as they do good.

Redcycle was a global technology leader, but it was handcuffed by a lack of political will, politicians too scared to oppose protestors. Which in the end prevented Redcycle from developing an end user market for it's product, relegated to collecting 300% more waste than they could recycle, and not having a revenue stream it went broke.

This technology has already moved off shore and will become a world leading part of the recycle, reuse, repurpose mantra, but not here, not in my backyard! It'll be foreign governments that get it right, and provide the infrastructure to advance the technologies that reduce waste, which apparently is not good enough for woke Australia.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 04:33:13 pm
Methane? Look over there - Redcycle!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:34:35 pm
I wonder if the fossil fuel industry will fund research into human and animal emissions of carbon dioxide versus emissions related to fossil fuels. No doubt the former are the real problem.
Facts help in a debate.

Methane is 35x more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

Total methane emissions equate to 1/200th of Total CO2 emissions.

About 60% of Total Methane emissions come from human activities, the rest is nature.

The largest known methane reserves are natural, if they burp they will potentially cause global effects that dwarf anthropomorphic greenhouse gas emissions. Every earthquake, every volcanic eruption, every tsunami is a roll of the dice.

Methane longevity in the environment is about 1/18th of the longevity of CO2.

But let's not worry about the facts, let's just ban anything that is methane, regardless of whether it leads to a cleaner environment.

The big problem isn't really the emissions of methane, because globally it has a miniscule effect, the really big and stupid problem is the fact it is another resource that gets wasted, humanity at it's best.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 04:40:19 pm
The burping tends to happen during oil extraction, fracking and the like. But let’s not worry about the facts.

What I want to know is why the big emitters of methane don’t capture it and convert it through catalysis into commercially saleable products? Isn’t that a licence to print money?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:42:17 pm
Sometimes I wonder if the anti-methane, anti-LPG or pro-electric cooking lobby have shares in the production of Induction Cooktops?

But will that new Induction Cooktop ever break even on the global carbon budget, with the elements and rare earths used in the power and electronics, or the specialist float glasses used for the hob?

Shhhh, lets not talk about the war, I want to sleep well!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 04:44:44 pm
Methane? Look over there - Induction Cooktops!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:47:22 pm
What I want to know is why the big emitters of methane don’t capture it and convert it through catalysis into commercially saleable products? Isn’t that a licence to print money?
If they could get a license, but the political will is not there, lobbyists are too powerful, the engineering and science doesn't really matter.

Recently, I noted councils around Australia have taken to banning Bluescope / BHP from using ethanol to power the steel and pickling mills. The BHP plan was that the factories would use the gas that is normally flared off to generate electricity that they needed for furnaces and operations. But that takes BHP/Bluescope off the grid as a user of renewable energy, a big earner for the energy sector, so the councils said no.

Yet the same councils issued new licenses for ethanol to be flared off, probably after it has been collected and compressed using SolarPV sourced energy! ::)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:47:54 pm
Methane, everywhere I look! ;)
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 04:51:08 pm
Of course we won't talk about steel production, CO2 emissions, collection, conversion and methanol, something that has been an integral part of the process for nearly 2 decades, an uncomfortable truth for the green lobbyists.

Because as you all know, the reduction of CO2 emissions, collection and conversion of waste gases, and the production of energy from the surpluses, can't be done.

Just ban the bastards, we don't need them, we can all drive EVs made of bamboo, for the life of me I can't work out why I aren't bashing this out on a paper mache keyboard!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 04:57:20 pm
If they could get a license, but the political will is not there, lobbyists are too powerful, the engineering and science doesn't really matter.
So when you claimed blue hydrogen production wouldn’t produce methane emissions because the methane would be catalysed into commercially saleable byproducts, you were being a bit disingenuous as you knew the political will isn’t there and the lobbyists are too powerful?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 05:08:33 pm
So when you claimed blue hydrogen production wouldn’t produce methane emissions because the methane would be catalysed into commercially saleable by-products, you were being a bit disingenuous as you knew the political will isn’t there and the lobbyists are too powerful?
No not at all, I'll reiterate the point you like to ignore, hydrogen as a by-product of mining is only the start up fuel, the ignition phase for a hydrogen economy. I have no idea why you are so hell bent on selectively spreading fear of some technologies, I'll presume you must have big shares in a competitive technology like solar or wind, as it can't be hydro.

Trying to paint blue, grey, technicolour hydrogen whatever you would like to laughingly label it as the one and only source is the misleading part of this debate. I've stated that before and I'll state it again whenever you make a point that seems to imply otherwise.

Nobody I have talked to in the industry expects hydrogen from methane to ever be more than a very small fraction of the bigger economy. But that doesn't mean methane can't be collected, converted or used for other chemical or energy sources. In fact one way to reduce methane emissions is to do just that, turn it into something of greater value, it's fairly obvious. We will never stop producing methane it's a fundamental by-product of human agriculture, chemical industries, pharmaceuticals, materials processing, etc., etc., in fact a fundamental by-product of life!

Yes, lobbyists are powerful, no matter how stupid they are they have clout, for example some are now try to ban nitrogen, yes that is correct there are lobbyists on the anti-nitrogen bandwagon, it must be very profitable, the band wagon is profitable not the nitrogen because we need to ban that!

Ar5es up, line up for your annual methane emissions check! ;D

I don't think you'll find anyone on the planet who thinks methane or any other chemical leak is OK. But I'm sure you'll find plenty of profiteers on both sides of the debate about leaks or spills and what to do about them.

Leaks and spills are not what would fuel the hydrogen economy, by the very definition of leak or spill!

If we stop the mining of rare-earths because of associated methane emissions, what then happens to those noble plans of growing the SolarPV market to the required 80% level, up from the current 3% level? That is right, the very latest figures from the EU itself on energy suggest total wind and solar is less than 3% of the global energy market, and has to get to 80% to reach net zero carbon! But if you genuinely followed that issue you would know that there was a international conference on this very issue right here in Victoria last week. In fact it was so low profile we didn't even have protestors, they must be still OS on holidays from attending COP, but those environmental bastards like BHP, Shell and Fortescue did attend. Real people, discussing real issues with real solutions, and not just a lot of bureaucratic or lobbyist hot air!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 05:41:21 pm
Assume away. As Felix Unger noted, when you ass-u-me, you make an ass out of u and me. Why don’t you buy me a huge tranche of shares just so you can make it so  ;) . Maybe you’ll have to sell off your big stake in the HESC project to do so though:

Japan to spend $2.35bn on turning Victorian Latrobe valley coal into ‘clean hydrogen’ (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/07/japan-to-spend-235bn-on-turning-victorian-latrobe-valley-coal-into-clean-hydrogen), The Guardian.

Quote
Critics have previously described the project as “just a new fossil fuel industry” that would see Australia generating greenhouse gas emissions onshore while exporting a cleaner fuel.

Neither of the two carbon storage sites identified by the project are close to being operational, yet are key to the project’s goals of producing cleaner hydrogen.

Stone said the project would bring coal gasification technology from J-Power’s Osaki CoolGen facility to Australia which, he said, was able to capture 90% of CO2 emissions from the process of turning the coal into synthetic gas and then extracting the hydrogen.

Stone said there were still investment decisions and government approvals to be gained, but the project was looking to produce its first hydrogen before the end of the decade.

Capturing and storing the CO2 “has to be part of the project” because without it “we can’t reach the carbon intensities that countries want” from clean hydrogen, Stone said.

The project’s target was to produce hydrogen clean enough to meet emerging benchmarks, he said, such as those of the US government which is providing tax breaks for hydrogen that emits less than 4kg of CO2 for every kilogram of the gas produced.

“We’re doing everything possible to make this as clean as possible. We’re trying to minimise CO2 in all elements of the project. Right now there’s 90 million tonnes of hydrogen being made every year with no abatement at all. That’s about 11.5kg of CO2 for every kilo of hydrogen.”

Captured CO2 would be sent by pipeline, Stone said, with two potential offshore storage facilities in the Bass Strait – Exxon’s Bream field project using depleted oil reservoirs or the Victorian and federal government-backed CarbonNet project. Neither project has been given the go-ahead.

Harada said: “This is a complex project and there is still some way to go in terms of approvals, design, construction and commissioning but this is a major boost for the Victorian economy on its journey towards a clean energy future.”

Dr Fiona Beck, an ANU expert on hydrogen’s role in the low carbon energy transition, said investment in infrastructure to liquefy, store, load and transport hydrogen was “really welcome”.

But she said investment in producing hydrogen from fossil fuels “risks locking us in to using fossil fuels for longer” when costs of producing hydrogen from renewable energy were falling fast.

“There’s a risk of stranded assets in this area,” she said.
Yep, nothing in there about converting methane into useful product or other means of disposing of it. And we have the pie-in-the-sky assumption that CCS will work even though there’s no CCS as yet. But we do note at least 10% of the carbon dioxide will be emitted. And we know damn well that if the scheme is approved, governments won’t allow the failure to make the CCS system operational to derail the project (given that it allows Victoria’s coal resources to be exploited and it’ll provide jobs in the Latrobe Valley). And that’s assuming that the government won’t be locked in by guaranteed contracts/subsidies and/or investments. As the final comment in the quote notes, ‘investment in producing hydrogen from fossil fuels “risks locking us in to using fossil fuels for longer” when costs of producing hydrogen from renewable energy were falling fast … There’s a risk of stranded assets in this area.’

In reality, we’ll just be extending the life of fossil fuels so we can make a product which can be shipped overseas as a clean energy source. We’ll have to hope that Australia or its customers won’t be forced to account for the emissions when climate change obligations tighten.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 08:44:39 pm
Yep, nothing in there about converting methane into useful product or other means of disposing of it. 
How dare they fail to talk about a technology that has been around for almost a hundred years as part of an article on new technologies, shocking!

As for the other part of the debate, hydrogen as a form of renewable energy for transport and storage, it's just absurd that someone would waste time developing energy resources from something as scarce as hydrogen, it's not like the universe is made from it! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 09:11:17 pm
How dare they fail to talk about a technology that has been around for almost a hundred years as part of an article on new technologies, shocking!
Then why the hell is no one doing it? As you say, it isn’t as though producers that are heavy emitters of methane wouldn’t be aware of a century-old technology.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 09:27:56 pm
How green is blue hydrogen? (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ese3.956), R.W. Howarth et al, Cornell University:
Quote
Abstract
Hydrogen is often viewed as an important energy carrier in a future decarbonized world. Currently, most hydrogen is produced by steam reforming of methane in natural gas (“gray hydrogen”), with high carbon dioxide emissions. Increasingly, many propose using carbon capture and storage to reduce these emissions, producing so-called “blue hydrogen,” frequently promoted as low emissions. We undertake the first effort in a peer-reviewed paper to examine the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of blue hydrogen accounting for emissions of both carbon dioxide and unburned fugitive methane. Far from being low carbon, greenhouse gas emissions from the production of blue hydrogen are quite high, particularly due to the release of fugitive methane. For our default assumptions (3.5% emission rate of methane from natural gas and a 20-year global warming potential), total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for blue hydrogen are only 9%-12% less than for gray hydrogen. While carbon dioxide emissions are lower, fugitive methane emissions for blue hydrogen are higher than for gray hydrogen because of an increased use of natural gas to power the carbon capture. Perhaps surprisingly, the greenhouse gas footprint of blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than burning natural gas or coal for heat and some 60% greater than burning diesel oil for heat, again with our default assumptions. In a sensitivity analysis in which the methane emission rate from natural gas is reduced to a low value of 1.54%, greenhouse gas emissions from blue hydrogen are still greater than from simply burning natural gas, and are only 18%-25% less than for gray hydrogen. Our analysis assumes that captured carbon dioxide can be stored indefinitely, an optimistic and unproven assumption. Even if true though, the use of blue hydrogen appears difficult to justify on climate grounds.
Wow, that’s quite a take-down 😂
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 09:52:04 pm
How green is blue hydrogen? (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ese3.956), R.W. Howarth et al, Cornell University:Wow, that’s quite a take-down 😂
Do you know what steam reforming actually is?

The paper you cite assumes future hydrogen production comes by steam reforming of methane using natural gas or fossil fuels as the energy source for the process, so they allocate the total carbon emissions from the energy production and the miniscule by-product CO2 from steam reforming as a hydrogen CO2 emission, you have to be guidable to swallow that pill.

Why would any industry pay for energy if SolarPV or Solar Thermal is effective and viable, unless of course you think Solar energy is a mirage and there is a need to use a higher calorific energy source to produce hydrogen. Or unless you plan nuclear and need base load demand such as desalination or hydrogen production to draw down the surplus.

As I have stated, hydrogen production from non-renewable sources is expected to be a very very small percentage of the larger hydrogen economy, there is nothing to fear. Long term the vast bulk of hydrogen will come to market using renewable resources, it'll be a compact, energy dense, transportable source free of carbon emission.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 07, 2023, 09:56:04 pm
Then why the hell is no one doing it?
Methane capture and conversion is done pretty much everywhere big industry exists, just because you just haven't heard about it doesn't mean it is not being done!

Within a few hours drive of where you are right now there are probably hundreds of sites doing it 24x7. You find it in all sorts of smelters, mills, food processing, energy production, chemical production, agriculture, the crime isn't that it's not being done but that it's not compulsory to do it and that there is no infrastructure to deal with the hydrogen produced.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 10:05:04 pm
Again, big emitters like oil and gas companies are sitting on an absolute gold mine! But strangely enough, they flare the methane or, as with the Turkmenistanis, just release it directly into the atmosphere. Something doesn’t add up, does it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 07, 2023, 10:19:09 pm
I’m not guidable, or should I say I won’t take you on as my guide.

Is hydrogen really a clean enough fuel to tackle the climate crisis? (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/07/hydrogen-clean-fuel-climate-crisis-explainer), The Guardian.

Quote
It’s already used for rocket fuel, but it is now being pushed as a clean and safe alternative to oil and gas for heating and earthly modes of transport. Political support is mounting with almost $26bn of US taxpayer money available for hydrogen projects thanks to three recent laws – the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Chips Act. Hydrogen is politically hot, but is it the climate solution that its cheerleaders are claiming?

Why all the hype about hydrogen?
The short answer is that the fossil fuel industry sees hydrogen as a way to keep on drilling and building new infrastructure, and has successfully deployed its PR and lobbying machines over the past few years to get policymakers thinking that hydrogen is a catch-all climate solution. Research by climate scientists (without fossil fuel links) has debunked industry claims that hydrogen should be a major player in our decarbonised future, though hydrogen extracted from water (using renewable energy sources) could – and should – play an important role in replacing the dirtiest hydrogen currently extracted from fossil fuels. It may also have a role in fuelling some transportation like long-haul flights and vintage cars, but the evidence is far from clear. However, with billions of climate action dollars up for grabs in the US alone, expect to see more lobbying, more industry-funded evidence and more hype.

Blue hydrogen is what the fossil fuel industry is most invested in, as it still comes from gas but ostensibly the CO2 would be captured and stored underground. The industry claims to have the technology to capture 80-90% of CO2, but in reality, it’s closer to 12% when every stage of the energy-intensive process is evaluated, according to a peer-reviewed study by scientists at Cornell University published in 2021. For sure better than nothing, but methane emissions, which warm the planet faster than CO2, would actually be higher than for grey hydrogen because of the additional gas needed to power the carbon capture, and likely upstream leakage. Notably, the term clean hydrogen was coined by the fossil fuel industry a few months after the seminal Cornell study found that blue hydrogen has a substantially larger greenhouse gas footprint than burning gas, coal or diesel oil for heating.

What’s at stake?
In addition to $26bn in direct financing for so-called hydrogen hubs and demo projects, another $100bn or so in uncapped tax credits could be paid out over the next few decades, so lots and lots of taxpayers’ money. Fossil fuel companies are also using hydrogen to justify building more pipelines, claiming that this infrastructure can be used for “clean hydrogen” in the future. But hydrogen is a highly flammable and corrosive element, and it would be costly to repurpose oil and gas infrastructure to make it safe for hydrogen. And while hydrogen is not a greenhouse gas, it is not harmless. It aggravates some greenhouse gases, for instance causing methane to stay in the atmosphere for longer.

“This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in actual zero-emission solutions, but could be a disaster if the federal government pours scarce resources into infrastructure and technologies that could make the climate crisis worse and cause further public health harms,” said Sara Gersen, clean energy attorney at Earthjustice. “Sowing confusion about hydrogen is a delay tactic, and delay is the new denialism.”

Is there any role for hydrogen in a decarbonised future?
Yes, but a limited one – given that it takes more energy to produce, store and transport hydrogen than it provides when converted into useful energy, so using anything but new renewable sources (true green hydrogen) will require burning more fossil fuels.

According to the hydrogen merit ladder devised by Michael Liebreich, host of the Cleaning Up podcast, swapping clean hydrogen for the fossil fuel-based grey and brown stuff currently used for synthetic fertilisers, petrochemicals and steel is a no-brainer. The carbon footprint of global hydrogen production today is equivalent to Germany’s annual greenhouse gas emissions, so the sooner we swap to green hydrogen (created from new renewables) the better. This could also be useful for some transportation, such as long-haul flights and heavy machinery, and maybe to store surplus wind and solar energy – though none are slam dunks for hydrogen as there are alternative technologies vying for these markets, said Liebreich.

But for most forms of transport (cars, bikes, buses and trains) and heating there are already safer, cleaner and cheaper technologies such as battery-run electric vehicles and heat pumps, so there’s little or no merit in investing time or money with hydrogen. Howarth said: “Renewable electricity is a scarce resource. Direct electrification and batteries offer so much more, and much more quickly. It’s a huge distraction and waste of resources to even be talking about heating homes and passenger vehicles with hydrogen.”

Looks like the fossil fuel industry will get its teeth into clean energy funding one way or the other in the US and here with the Latrobe Valley blue hydrogen plant. The fossil fuel industry is like a vampire - unless you put a stake through its heart, it’ll survive any attempt to limit climate change. Just as the cigarette companies moved seamlessly to vapes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on March 08, 2023, 07:58:04 am
I’m not guidable, or should I say I won’t take you on as my guide.

Is hydrogen really a clean enough fuel to tackle the climate crisis? (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/07/hydrogen-clean-fuel-climate-crisis-explainer), The Guardian.

Looks like the fossil fuel industry will get its teeth into clean energy funding one way or the other in the US and here with the Latrobe Valley blue hydrogen plant. The fossil fuel industry is like a vampire - unless you put a stake through its heart, it’ll survive any attempt to limit climate change. Just as the cigarette companies moved seamlessly to vapes.

Not unlike the nicotine delivery industry. Once they couldn't advertise any longer, and the durries fell out of favour, they went into the patches, vapes, gum, oral spray and lozenge nicotine delivery industries. (the number of folks addicted to the 'cures' is pretty outrageous).
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 08, 2023, 08:05:33 am
Again, big emitters like oil and gas companies are sitting on an absolute gold mine! But strangely enough, they flare the methane or, as with the Turkmenistanis, just release it directly into the atmosphere. Something doesn’t add up, does it?
You are confusing an engineering / science issue with an issue of politics, economic and law.

If climate change is a genuine issue, then why do the percentage efficiencies matter to you so much you oppose all better technologies, an emission cut is an emission cut isn't it?

What is the obsession with backing one solution?

btw., The latest science from those institutes you like to quote has an updated version of climate change, why aren't you quoting that, is it because they are saying your SolarPV is no longer enough? Cornell, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, they recently started sprouting a need for nuclear(fusion or fission), because they now claim emissions must be negative, in fact they have put negative emissions policies in place for their own operations..

Business, especially big business, doesn't just setup and do what it likes, it has to be issued licences and permits. The example I gave about ethanol shows just how restrictive and myopic bureaucracy can be, even when there are immediate solutions to massively reduce a waste the bureaucracy opts for the status quo under pressure from a minority that spreads fear.

You can look over there if you want, we all can, but it's just more of the same!

Why is that minority spreading fear, the major opposition to many projects is not generated because they are infeasible, but fundamentally because they are a feasible alternative to something else, because it's fundamentally a battle for fund$ not a battle of technology.

The renewables sector needs politicians to keep thinking there are no alternatives or else the subsidies will dry up and the true cost of renewables will be exposed to the general public slowing uptake. They are frantic to find a non-rare earth alternative to continue SolarPV uptake, because if they fail they know the politicians will turn to technologies they fear like hydrogen and nuclear. But institutes like Harvard and Cornell are starting to question the viability of SolarPV, simply because of resource issues, it turns out that if you really do the sums on what is required to SolarPV to 80% market saturation there simply isn't enough rare materials easily accessible in the earth crust to do it at a viable cost level.

Some engineers and scientists are even touting nuclear connected to desalination plants as a alternative source, producing many of the rare materials as a by-products. To most involved in the industry this is a der Fred moment, but it would be political poison for the industry if it came out and stated it has a dependency of nuclear to reach it's targets. You will even find half-baked ideas to autonomously mine the seabed for mineral precipitates, this is primarily to meet a demand driven by SolarPV and Wind turbine production, worrying about the damage some existing imperfect process causes seems fairly trivial, and opposing improvements in those process is outright sponsoring environmental vandalism! :o

I was involved in a project a few years ago that developed some new materials processing techniques, that were designed to be sustainable from the ground up. The process eliminated every type of industrial waste from a certain industrial process, was cheaper to run, and made zero use of rare resources. Yet it failed, not because it didn't work, but because in the EU political funds to oppose change were almost 1000% higher than those allocated for the development of technology. It failed because lawyers made themselves richer out of opposing change than adopting it, leeching off a EU$120M annual fighting fund designed to "preserve EU jobs" in Eastern block countries. It seems that even in the woke EU pollution is OK as long as it is NIMBY, the same as here it seems.

Just like with COVID, when the moment there were viable treatments or vaccines available, the politicians blinked and the government funding dried up, the public had to pay directly. The same might happen to SolarPV, and that is the founding fear of much of the opposition to all the other solutions.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 08, 2023, 10:49:22 am
I’m all for more information about the latest scientific opinions about renewables but please link or quote rather than just giving a broad brush summary that always seems to be a bit self-serving. By the way, the study from Cornell was from 2021 but the lead author was quoted in The Guardian article which is fresh as a daisy. And yet his views don’t evidence the shift you suggest.

I’m sure you’ve given us your honest opinion about what stopped the project in which you were involved. But it seems to me that you aren’t great at providing a dispassionate analysis of the business case of projects. You have a cockeyed optimism that any weakness in a project can be overcome if only science is left alone to do its thing and the economic issues can be ignored. Yet reality has a way of hitting people in the face. I still can’t understand why you just wave your hand when oil and gas producers act contrary to your assurance that methane is a gold mine. They just burn it or release it. But apparently producers of blue hydrogen will be stunned by their good fortune and exploit methane byproducts to the hilt. Yes, there are those who think they can make Turquoise Hydrogen a thing, but it’s yet to be proved at scale (and the real world effect on the markets for those byproducts has yet to be seen). But why wouldn’t that be trumpeted far and wide by this Latrobe Valley project if that were even in contemplation? Imagine the favourable press you’d get boasting of turning methane into gold …

In your world, there’s only 1 type of conspiracy at play here. Apparently, bureaucrats, lawyers and economists are being pressured into blocking brilliant projects that use coal and the like by those nasty and all-powerful greenies. Won’t anyone help the poor fossil fuel industry when it just wants to work for the common good? Fear not, the fossil fuel industry is the one with the clout here, not the greenies. They pretty much have the conservative parties in the US and here on their payroll. And playing the victim is so on trend for conservatives even when they are the ones who have the power. And let’s face it - they have deep pockets and can pressure governments with almost unlimited advertising budgets (especially around elections) and lobbying efforts.

But you are right when you note there’s a battle for funding. The fossil fuel industry can crowd out green solutions if its “clean” solutions can suck in government funding. That’s especially so in Victoria as we have coal to exploit and a regional area that was dependent on coal-fired power. Once the government gets behind blue hydrogen, the die is cast as the infrastructure will be built around where the coal is rather than where the water is that green hydrogen production requires.

But we come back to the central weakness in the business case for blue hydrogen. How does it make sense to provide vast quantities of power to that industry just so it can produce a much smaller amount of power for largely overseas users? The energy loss involved in the process is staggering. It’s also bizarre that we would produce green electricity so we can avoid generating emissions only to use it to produce a lesser amount of power while releasing greenhouse emissions. And as the Cornell study showed, even if only green electricity is used in the process the emissions generated would be larger than if we just kept on using coal and petrol as we are now. That’s ripe for satire. If only the writers behind Yes, Minister were still around.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 08, 2023, 11:35:19 am
@Mav, generalising the case whether the debate is economic, technical or scientific isn't valid. There is no one answer to suit all cases, some may imagine there is, but that is the problem it's imagination not reality.

The case for fossil fuel sourced hydrogen as a foundational source for a hydrogen economy is a prime example. Many want to paint it as the one and only path forward, and so assert that is a good enough reason not to pursue hydrogen in total as a solution. It's a flawed argument, based on a false premise, a conspiracy wanted to justify a political position. I don't know anybody in the industry making such assertions, in fact pretty much everyone I talk to claims the exact opposite, that the plan is to migrate to clean hydrogen sources as rapidly as possible. This makes the papers you list a bit ludicrous, the figures might be accurate but they are creatively twisted for political purposes.

Whether you like it or not, hydrogen economy is here to stay, it's one of only a handful of viable energy storage and transport solutions for a large sector of the modern economy. Given you are wealthy enough you can install a converter / generator at home right now and be free of the grid, recharge your EV and also heat your home, with power reserves far beyond those economically achievable by the best cost equivalent batteries or other alternatives. Flow batteries might one day become available, but at this time there is no available option although they are being worked on.

Hydrogen makes up about 75.2% of the matter in the visible known universe, it will never run out, it's also the ultimate source of the light harvested by SolarPV! :o

PS; Repeating, hydrogen from methane is already done at scale, with minimal greenhouse emissions, the fact that it isn't been done on a wider scale is the real environmental crime. If it was subsidised like SolarPV and given the same political will it would proliferate rapidly.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 08, 2023, 12:03:16 pm
Again, the fossil fuel industry is very keen to avoid becoming a fossil itself. If it can generate new markets by catalysing methane and win positive coverage for doing so while neutralising a major criticism, it will. The industry can subsidise such efforts itself as it has deep pockets. The fact that it isn’t being done speaks for itself.

PS; Repeating, hydrogen from methane is already done at scale, with minimal greenhouse emissions, the fact that it isn't been done on a wider scale is the real environmental crime.
If that’s true, that would be significant. Can you please provide details so I can look into it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 08, 2023, 12:48:48 pm
If that’s true, that would be significant. Can you please provide details so I can look into it?
Most commonly, pretty much any major smelter or steel mill does this already, where did you think all the knowledge about steam reformation comes from?

Large scale agriculture gets onboard as well but from what I can tell not here in Australia, by large scale I mean of Elder's IXL scale not just the local big dairy farmer, corporations that are held accountable for emissions implement this as almost a first step. I can't tell you how many or who but I'll be gobsmacked if some aren't using part of  the emissions captured to generate electricity and earning feed in tariffs as part of the process.

For example, despite the Australian parent company folding back in 2018, CFCL's fuel cell technology (a CSIRO Invention) continues on in Europe and has become a major player in turning captured emissions into heat and power in northern European locations. Locally there was a whole pilot suburb developed using the technology, I can't tell you what happened to it, I believe it was out west of Melbourne somewhere to take advantage of captured emissions from Melbourne Water. In total there were about 300 homes.

Scale is not a problem, political and corporate will is the biggest issue. For CFCL the biggest potential investor was the energy industry, but in the absence of legislation how do you get them to invest in a technology that removes customers from the grid. They get to sell the single consumer a gadget that costs about the price of a small car, and they are basically gone from the grid forever powered by what is currently classified as waste. If CFCL was still about, they would be as big of a player in southern regions outside of metropolitan areas as wind energy. But they aren't and they probably won't ever be because the IP is now privately held. So should we abandon a technology locally because Australia is big and it's not valid for the tropical end?

Just an aside, a single CFCL Device was about the size of a fridge, and if installed in something like a dairy farm could generate enough power and heat from captured emissions to power the whole farming operation and perhaps even still have surplus to sell back to the grid. But unlike solar, there was no legislation so no feed in tariff, the energy you made but did not use was returned to the grid for free! The energy providers would not buy in because they lose a customer, and the customers would not buy in because there was no requirement and no return, then solar and wind turns up with legislation that requires profit-sharing.

I know the people in CFCL were left stunned, it was like being beaten to death with a velvet sledgehammer, people were the puzzle they could not solve, the technology was dead easy!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 08, 2023, 02:06:48 pm
So, none that involve blue hydrogen producers or oil and gas producers. That says it all, doesn’t it? Again, why doesn’t the fossil fuel industry lead the way by showing how profitable and clean it is to make things out of their methane byproduct? Are they hanging out for more government subsidies?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 08, 2023, 03:07:05 pm
So, none that involve blue hydrogen producers or oil and gas producers. That says it all, doesn’t it? Again, why doesn’t the fossil fuel industry lead the way by showing how profitable and clean it is to make things out of their methane byproduct? Are they hanging out for more government subsidies?
They are corporates and they want certainty, to do this stuff at scale costs money, and you need long term certainty to make the figures work for a ROI.

When a mill, smelter or dairy farm goes down this path, including the licensing and compliance, they do so at a level that services their own interest, but perhaps the issue is more about percentages. There is a lot of argy bargy about how many tonnes of methane gets discarded or accidentally spilled, but what is it as a percentage of the bigger production figure. Which was the point I was getting to earlier about effects, longevity and relative ratios. Maybe if you are coal mining for your power plant the methane emissions aren't even on the right scale to register on the graph!

Even if at scale it's a blip on the graph, it might be a significant resource for other markets. I bet those that continue to operate generating methane do something once a market for the end product is established and it has some intrinsic value to them, I suppose that comes about when demand exceeds the amount we produce. They won't want to do what Redcycle did and develop massive amount of product without a customer to sell it to!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Mav on March 08, 2023, 04:34:41 pm
That final point is the one I’ve been making repeatedly. You say there’s a market for catalysed byproducts of methane and that the market will absorb any amount produced. But that is exactly the Redcycle problem. Once you divorce production levels from market demand for byproducts, you’ll have a Redcycle oversupply which can’t be sustained.

You also sing from the fossil fuel industry’s songbook: give us ironclad long-term contracts and subsidies to clean up coal, gas and oil and we’ll do it. They realise that investors will be looking at how they’ll compete against alternatives 5, 10, 20 years down the track and they know they won’t like what the future holds.

You moan over CFCL’s demise. But it shut up shop in Australia because the government wouldn’t compel energy companies to buy the product. At best, it was a transitional solution. It converted natural gas into energy. The draw card was that it would emit much less than coal-fired plants running on brown coal. But that’s like saying Carlton would do better than me on the list than Zac Williams in the coming year. Both involve setting a very low bar. And we can do better than “we’re better than the crappiest product”.

If that technology was a winner, wouldn’t it now be a major player? Oh yes, I forgot: the Deep State and powerful lobbyists have strangled it at birth.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 08, 2023, 05:29:29 pm
That final point is the one I’ve been making repeatedly. You say there’s a market for catalysed byproducts of methane and that the market will absorb any amount produced. But that is exactly the Redcycle problem. Once you divorce production levels from market demand for byproducts, you’ll have a Redcycle oversupply which can’t be sustained.
You're assuming no change in the market, Redcycle's problem is that it ploughed ahead too fast, before there was a market to sell to or infrastructure to handle the product. They collected 300x the waste they could convert, they became a patsy waste repository for all the green councils to dump the unwanted rubbish at and get a pat on the back for recycling, another con! Now the same councils and politicians are trying to blame Redcycle for failing, I bet they bury the lot or a good portion of it and blame Redcycle for that as well! ;)

You ponder why they aren't doing it already, it's a chicken and egg question, at the moment there are no hydrogen consuming resources to sell to, we already produce more hydrogen than we can store or use so it just floats out of the atmosphere. At the moment it's considered a waste just like some of the methane from certain mining operations, and that designation is a crime. It can be fertilizer, it can be pharmaceuticals, in fact it will be because if we ban / close much of the natural gas mining then those industries will be forced to look for the methane they use now from other sources.

Many of the leaks are coming from capped wells, not capped because they want to stop it leaching in the environment, capped because it has an intrinsic value, the capped mines are storage units not the waste repositories, it's a future resource and they know it. Another crime is that they are not required to do anything with it, they get richer everyday it stays in the ground, they get richer for doing nothing!

Hydrogen won't be a by-product, it'll be "the product."

CFCL wasn't just about natural gas, that is the marketing blurb, they had already developed stacks that used methane and hydrogen, when they folded they were developing a stack to capture and convert some harmful toxic gases. Natural gas was just the thing investors could understand, the place residential houses could get energy from by pipeline or bottle. A large chunk of the northern hemisphere industrial installations of the technology run on methane by-product from the dairy industry, as I have already mentioned. There were several sites using captured methane from geothermal processes, but I know that has a longevity issue due to sulphurous contaminants so they might no longer be running.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 10, 2023, 08:12:42 am
Interesting to read some debate around micro-nuclear, these are sub-100MW reactors being developed by several countries, designed to power a suburb not a city. R&D is happening in the USA, Japan, UK, France and Sth Korea, it may well be under way in China as well somewhere. These are the systems some refer to as "nuclear batteries", they can be small enough to be transported by crane or plane and fit on a suburban block or in a building basement, and delivery energies like 9MW at that scale, that's on average enough to feed 3ooo homes.

One of the big arguments against this micro-nuclear was the rising costs, the opponents claim the increased costs of materials has pushed the unit energy cost from $50 to $80 per Megawatt. The primary factor was the rising cost of copper, which up about 40% at the moment, and even higher increases in Europe. The they go on to claim SolarPV and Wind is getting cheaper, the price per Megawatt falling all the time! :o

What I'm really interested in is this, what are those magic and cheap materials that SolarPV and Wind have found to replace copper so they can achieve this fall in costs while competitor energy sources suffer increases?

As far as I know, Wind is the energy industries biggest user of copper, those turbines are basically 300T of CP(Commercially Pure) copper on a 80m high stick. Even the cables and cooling system use specially formulated copper alloys to get the energy out with minimal loss.

Even SolarPV uses a lot of copper, SolarPV generates DC not AC, the high voltage DC has to be converted to AC. High voltage DC needs heavier cables than AC, the invertor process uses copper, etc., etc., there is even copper in the heat stinks and panels!

So if you haven't worked it out yet, the claims that rising costs (primarily copper) are driving up the unit energy cost of micro-nuclear making it not viable versus SolarPV or Wind are bogus!

If they are going to oppose something then oppose it, it's all good that is how things get better by being challenged, but don't make up bullsh1t just to justify a political position.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 21, 2023, 12:19:09 am
The Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries Zero and Low Emission Report 2022 appeared in my inbox and it has some interesting facts and statistics that may confuse or amuse depending on your take.
Petrol and Diesel sales make up 86% of the market which in total cars sold numbers was 1,081,429.....for those still discussing the merits of hydrogen the Aus public decided 15 Hydrogen powered cars was all they could muster so I think its going to be a very long time if at all before Hydrogen powered vehicles gain any traction in the land down under.
Of course there has to be infrastructure to make it happen but with no sales its a bit of a what comes first in terms of the chicken and the egg scenario. With only three filling stations based in the ACT, Sydney and Melbourne its going to be difficult to get people interested and you have to wonder how green that hydrogen they are supplying is as well, probably from a 3rd party steam/methane dirty variety source..
The EV vehicle market is owned by Tesla Model 3 and Model Y...other manufacturers sales are off a cliff in comparison to Elon Musk's offerings, next best are BYD Atto and Polestar so you are buying an experiment if you buy one of those new brands...

Toyota own the Hybrid market.......its a no contest approx 76k for Toyota and the next best being Lexus(Toyota) with about 3k.
I wonder what affect these fuel saving Atkinson effect engines which usually come with these Hybrids is having on overall total fuel savings?
Plug in Hybrid sales are poor, seems no one wants to know about them even though they would be my preferred option.

One interesting stat is the Governments takeup of EV's....which includes Federal, State and local....488 Fully EV vehicles only bought by those in charge who want the public to Green up but dont seem that interested themselves...thats a pathetic amount considering the pressure on the average joe to do his bit for the environment as well as corporates.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 21, 2023, 08:13:01 am
@ElwoodBlues1‍ it's all about infrastructure.

For the moment EVs are being purchase by the green elite and / or casual road users, the problem is recharge times. Most only have single phase at home so a fast charger is not an option unless you they out $20k for a big battery and have access to a large area for north facing solar. They are OK if you potter about each day and can slow charge overnight, never approaching the range limit. Of course some do not care about recovering the costs so they do it as a community benefit project, but a lot of people cannot afford that option.

If you are lucky you might have an employer who has setup charging in the carpark, but they are few and far between.

Public slow charging is available but still in trivial quantities. When I attended a conference in the CBD a couple of weeks back and made note of the charging options, they had 34 chargers available, when you look at a wall of these things it seems a lot but the carpark has just under 2000 spots. If each car charges in 30mins you can only charge 68 per day, maybe they charge in 20mins so that's 102!

I've a mate in the UK who was an early adopter of the Tesla, he raved on and one about it, and how he'd recharge for free at the supercharge station while getting a coffee, they have them on the freeways. But just last week he was complaining that it's getting harder to get the free fast charge, many of the popular / convenient sites now require you to book a time slot. and at some in peak hour you now have to pay a peak demand fee like the way Uber apply surcharges! As an early adopter he paid nearly $250K for the Tesla 100D and is eligible for free for life recharging, but the free part is becoming untenable, he feels conned and is seriously thinking of going back to a hybrid!

My mate joked with me about a Green politician in the UK that is pushing for EV Ambulance, when they did the sums it's would only reach 27% duty cycle due to the constant need for recharging ( The average is about 60% but don't ask me how this is measured ). They worked out that fast charging helped, but that slashes the battery life and the fancy battery is many times the cost of one used in a car.

In the short term I doubt hydrogen is a viable option for cars, at least not until residential hydrogen generation becomes available but it's still in it's development phase. However, hydrogen is a very serious option for commercial or public transport, perhaps even agriculture, where you can have your own depo / refilling stations.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on March 21, 2023, 08:16:42 am
EB, I think that will turn as the dinosaurs move through the political/public service system.
Government has a duty to provide practical support.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on April 03, 2023, 03:57:32 pm
Hopefully one day somebody will be able to explain to me this little curiosity.

If EVs are about saving the environment, and in EV land efficiency and range is king, why the feck do they cover these things in LEDs like they are a mobile Christmas tree?

They are so glitter they are almost as offensive as Liberace on viagra overload, not a pretty sight!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on April 22, 2023, 12:59:15 pm
Quite a nice rant, built on an error, a bit lengthy, bit verbose, but well worth a listen if you are interested in the reality of the CO2 emissions scenario.

He covers the vehicle operation and part of the origination, but doesn't include emissions for solar panels or home batteries. And he doesn't account for the early demise of the combustion vehicle well before it's origination overhead is exhausted.

I screwed up about EVs - big time | Auto Expert John Cadogan - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djuy1KFOTLY)

We need nuclear now, in fact we needed nuclear yesterday, but everyday we delay things get worse.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on April 23, 2023, 09:26:47 am
Germany have closed their last nuclear reactor and essentially have gone back to coal to fill the energy gap.
Wonder if Greta will pay them a visit...?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on April 23, 2023, 10:37:26 am
Germany have closed their last nuclear reactor and essentially have gone back to coal to fill the energy gap.
Wonder if Greta will pay them a visit...?
This is a tragedy happening before our eyes, although you might note that Germany takes a big chunk of it's energy off France, France is basically 100% nuclear. However, the war has made for slim pickings in the energy market and the capacity is being stretched to the limit, there are serious possibilities of people freezing to death in the next European winter.

So much for the affluent west!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on April 23, 2023, 10:39:12 am
Germany have closed their last nuclear reactor and essentially have gone back to coal to fill the energy gap.
Wonder if Greta will pay them a visit...?


Germany made the mistake of ambitious 'green' energy (solar) when the place doesn't have enough sunlight to capture and store energy. Solar is only achievable in countries like ours, parts of the US, Africa, S America and so on from what I've read by experts in the field.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on April 23, 2023, 10:42:33 am
Germany made the mistake of ambitious 'green' energy (solar) when the place doesn't have enough sunlight to capture and store energy. Solar is only achievable in countries like ours, parts of the US, Africa, S America and so on from what I've read by experts in the field.
Correct, as a grid replacement for base load energy production it's only viable in dry areas close to the equator.

There is also a crunch coming for these big large scale installations, it turns out the panels are aging much faster than predicted, who could have known that the corporates and executives would have oversold the performance and longevity, or undermined the manufacturing process with lower quality resources! :o While they will keep working for many years, it will be at reduced capacity, profits will be lower.

So what do the corporates do? Of course they slash the staffing levels, repairs and maintenance get it in the neck, which means the panels degrade in performance even faster!

btw., the very same is happening in wind as well, watch the big super-funds start to bail out as they realise that future liabilities are going to smash returns.

That's the tough thing about reality, it doesn't give a rats-ar5e about human opinions or politics.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on June 01, 2023, 12:01:44 pm
Saw this on he news the other night. A pity the fool who I catch deflating the tyres on my vehicle.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/on-the-road/radical-climate-activists-pushing-to-inconvenience-suv-owners-by-deflating-4x4-tyres-in-major-cities/news-story/e35346a24a6b6254e9420949c61a52cd
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 01, 2023, 02:51:18 pm
Saw this on he news the other night. A pity the fool who I catch deflating the tyres on my vehicle.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/on-the-road/radical-climate-activists-pushing-to-inconvenience-suv-owners-by-deflating-4x4-tyres-in-major-cities/news-story/e35346a24a6b6254e9420949c61a52cd
The Ute craze in out of control in Australia, those RAM trucks are monsters and when they start turning them out as EVs with massive batteries onboard they will stuff up and damage the roads given the weight they carry.
Our roads are not designed to carry so many vehicles of this size/weight and its only going to cost all of us more money.
And all these clowns with massive Bullbars on the front of their vehicles as well driving around in the city covered with incorrectly wired driving lights that are not connected to high beam circuits that blind you at night when driving.
What do you need a bullbar and an array of driving lights for in the city anyway?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 01, 2023, 02:57:49 pm
What do you need a bullbar and an array of driving lights for in the city anyway?
I have no problem with tradies using these for work, they are every bit as useful as the more traditional tradie vans and twin cabs.

But now I see mum's dropping kids off at private school with RAM, Ford F and Silverado, they are going up a level from Prado / Landcruiser, Range Rover or Pajero to American trucks!

I was talking to a school volunteer who does crossing duty, she complained that because these Yank tanks can't fit standard carparks they pull up wherever they like, apparently one stopped blocking the exit for everybody and when she was ask the move she replied "Make me", which says more about the driver than just about anything else! :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on June 01, 2023, 03:42:37 pm
The Ute craze in out of control in Australia, those RAM trucks are monsters and when they start turning them out as EVs with massive batteries onboard they will stuff up and damage the roads given the weight they carry.
Our roads are not designed to carry so many vehicles of this size/weight and its only going to cost all of us more money.
And all these clowns with massive Bullbars on the front of their vehicles as well driving around in the city covered with incorrectly wired driving lights that are not connected to high beam circuits that blind you at night when driving.
What do you need a bullbar and an array of driving lights for in the city anyway?
Apart from all the above, I also have the shotgun rack mounted on the cargo barrier which I need to shoot up stop signs , water tanks, protected fauna and scare off pesky tyre deflators.
Its a big country, plenty of room for everyone, protest all you like, just don't touch my big, fat, fuel swilling 4WD!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on June 01, 2023, 03:44:06 pm
I have no problem with tradies using these for work, they are every bit as useful as the more traditional tradie vans and twin cabs.

But now I see mum's dropping kids off at private school with RAM, Ford F and Silverado, they are going up a level from Prado / Landcruiser, Range Rover or Pajero to American trucks!

I was talking to a school volunteer who does crossing duty, she complained that because these Yank tanks can't fit standard carparks they pull up wherever they like, apparently one stopped blocking the exit for everybody and when she was ask the move she replied "Make me", which says more about the driver than just about anything else! :o
Owning said vehicle type and driving legally and responsibly are two seperate issues, one doesn't imply the other.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 01, 2023, 03:55:35 pm
I suspect around some of the Vic timber towns the Bullbars might be relabelled in coming weeks, Brandtbars, Greenbars!

Green can be a horribly introspective culture, banning "old growth" logging, but really much of the alleged "old growth" has been logged at least once or twice over the last 120 years. So technically what is "old growth" to someone in 2023?

I thought it made sense to work towards the sustainable management of "old growth" versus softwoods and plantation renewables. All that was needed was a total quota that restricted old growth felling regions to once every 50 or 80 years and it would have been all OK, that by definition is a restriction to 1.25% to 2% per year!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on June 01, 2023, 07:40:44 pm
This is the product of getting rid of decent cars.  I drive a Mondeo.  It's 15 years old, and is starting to show signs of the end.  My options to replace it are sfa and I can honestly state that my car is more capable of shifting stuff than the mrs nissan x trail. 

Mid sized sedan hatchback.  Not much available there anymore. 
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: spf on June 02, 2023, 12:49:32 am
Get yourself a Ford Transit van. Very environmentally friendly, they often sit on the side of the road not working at all. Saves on the emissions.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 02, 2023, 08:23:57 am
Get yourself a Ford Transit van. Very environmentally friendly, they often sit on the side of the road not working at all. Saves on the emissions.
Very popular with the Van life movement are Ford Transits...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 02, 2023, 10:45:12 am
Why stop at the Ford, might as well go all the way to a Combi!

I notice there is a maker movement converting these old vans to electric, sort of misses the point, the whole idea was they run on the smell and can go to anywhere you could buy a jerry of diesel off a farmer and at dirt cheap overheads. Once converted to electric will they take a genie and a 44 of diesel with them to recharge?

Electric vans sort of become the motoring version of coins in the electricity meter!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 02, 2023, 01:57:16 pm
Very very interesting developments surfacing in the hydrogen economy this week, Caltech has developed a new type of solar panel, but instead of generating electricity it generates hydrogen and other useful chemicals or compounds directly from the air. Technically it's a form of synthetic photosynthesis. Basically it takes CO2 and other gases from the air, and breaks reduces them to then form more desirable compounds in SolarSynthesis

The Moonshot for Caltech is to produce Aviation Fuel directly from the air, a completely circular process.

At the moment, the lab scale tests have the efficiency at nearly 20%, that is pretty much the same as SolarPV. The SolarSynthesis technology is based on silicon, so the expectation is that it will scale according to SolarPV.

If this is true no wonder Twiggy Forrest got out of Cannon-Brookes sun cable scheme! You can just make hydrogen and ship it via conventional pre-existing means to wherever you need the energy.

Who'd have thunk mimicking nature was a good idea? :o
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on June 02, 2023, 04:02:11 pm
Very very interesting developments surfacing in the hydrogen economy this week, Caltech has developed a new type of solar panel, but instead of generating electricity it generates hydrogen and other useful chemicals or compounds directly from the air. Technically it's a form of synthetic photosynthesis. Basically it takes CO2 and other gases from the air, and breaks reduces them to then form more desirable compounds in SolarSynthesis

The Moonshot for Caltech is to produce Aviation Fuel directly from the air, a completely circular process.

At the moment, the lab scale tests have the efficiency at nearly 20%, that is pretty much the same as SolarPV. The SolarSynthesis technology is based on silicon, so the expectation is that it will scale according to SolarPV.

If this is true no wonder Twiggy Forrest got out of Cannon-Brookes sun cable scheme! You can just make hydrogen and ship it via conventional pre-existing means to wherever you need the energy.

Who'd have thunk mimicking nature was a good idea? :o

Isn't solar more around 30-35% efficiency?

If what you say is true though, THAT is the type of green energy we should work towards.

Kills 2 birds with 1 stone, eliminating CO2, while providing oxygen and essentially power.

Of course.....we could just plant trees.....or better yet, algae. It produces more O2 than trees, and takes up less space in doing so. Has other benefits as well. Not sure how well it scales globally, but it doesn't have to be a standalone fix in itself....just part of a combination of fixes.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 02, 2023, 05:31:30 pm
Isn't solar more around 30-35% efficiency?
In the lab they are in the Mid to high 20s for short term solutions, but commercially and residential long life installations is low 20s.

There may be some thin film collapsible SolarPV systems that are above 20%, but they are not based on 24x7 operation, there are some R&D Solar EVs that are at or above 30% but the longevity is again low, less than 12 months.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: spf on June 03, 2023, 06:48:22 pm
Very popular with the Van life movement are Ford Transits...

I would imagine they would be, once you breakdown you can camp there. If they ask you to move, well, you can legitimately say it doesn't drive. If they tow you to a mechanic, the repair bills are so expensive you will end up camping out the front of the mechanics for years. Solve the rental crisis and emissions all at once.

You have to hand it to Ford, they really are ahead of their time.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 03, 2023, 06:59:42 pm
I would imagine they would be, once you breakdown you can camp there. If they ask you to move, well, you can legitimately say it doesn't drive. If they tow you to a mechanic, the repair bills are so expensive you will end up camping out the front of the mechanics for years. Solve the rental crisis and emissions all at once.

You have to hand it to Ford, they really are ahead of their time.
Fords service and support is woeful, if it wasnt for the Ranger they would go the way of Holden in this country.
Transits rust out badly and have a lot of cooling system issues but are popular for Van Builds as they have good headroom.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on June 03, 2023, 07:37:02 pm
Fords service and support is woeful, if it wasnt for the Ranger they would go the way of Holden in this country.
Transits rust out badly and have a lot of cooling system issues but are popular for Van Builds as they have good headroom.

I have only owned one Ford in over 40 years. It was an old EA wagon which I bought as a bit of a working hack. It suited that job but I would not have trusted it to do a long trip. Eventually the motor blew up, The bodywork was pretty tatty and rattly by that time.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 03, 2023, 07:46:12 pm
I have only owned one Ford in over 40 years. It was an old EA wagon which I bought as a bit of a working hack. It suited that job but I would not have trusted it to do a long trip. Eventually the motor blew up, The bodywork was pretty tatty and rattly by that time.
We had an EB Falcon sedan , drove really well and the seats were comfy but it went the way of all Fords of that generation and blew the headgasket twice. Wasn't a bad car to work on but everything just fell apart ..
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on June 03, 2023, 08:07:48 pm
Had an XE and an EF.

Both were good cars, the former was bought just after I was born, the latter was my upgrade when it died when I was 20.  I drove the EF Until 2008, when the transmission was going.  At the time was doing lots of city driving and parking so bought a 08 Mondeo diesel as I was going long distances on weekends. 

Mondeo is still going and touch wood is still reliable enough, but im starting to look for an upgrade.  It's had its time.  It could keep going a few years but will need some money im not sure is worth spending.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 03, 2023, 08:47:39 pm
Had an XE and an EF.

Both were good cars, the former was bought just after I was born, the latter was my upgrade when it died when I was 20.  I drove the EF Until 2008, when the transmission was going.  At the time was doing lots of city driving and parking so bought a 08 Mondeo diesel as I was going long distances on weekends. 

Mondeo is still going and touch wood is still reliable enough, but im starting to look for an upgrade.  It's had its time.  It could keep going a few years but will need some money im not sure is worth spending.
An old workmate of mine had a Mondeo Wagon and was very happy with it, he had trouble finding a replacement but went with a
Subaru Outback.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Professer E on June 05, 2023, 08:22:17 am
My newish diesel truck does under 6 litres per 100 in the country plus my bullbar comes in handy with the plethora of skippys in my part of the world.  Vehicles are another tool like an axe or a spanner- use something fit for purpose, not because your ass looks better in it- as a society we are obsessed with status and appearances.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 05, 2023, 11:26:20 am
I've always though the very best car you can possibly drive is the one you do not have to pay for!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 05, 2023, 01:25:35 pm
My newish diesel truck does under 6 litres per 100 in the country plus my bullbar comes in handy with the plethora of skippys in my part of the world.  Vehicles are another tool like an axe or a spanner- use something fit for purpose, not because your ass looks better in it- as a society we are obsessed with status and appearances.
Nothing wrong with a dual cab/4WD in the bush with a bull bar etc, my gripe is in the busy suburbs where there is no need for the them and as you say its more about the look and status than the practicalities.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on June 05, 2023, 05:11:58 pm
Nothing wrong with a dual cab/4WD in the bush with a bull bar etc, my gripe is in the busy suburbs where there is no need for the them and as you say its more about the look and status than the practicalities.
Bit of a generalisation there EB, not everyone buys them for status.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 05, 2023, 05:39:26 pm
Bit of a generalisation there EB, not everyone buys them for status.
Not many Kangaroos or off road tracks in my suburb GTC.
Bloke next door to me has three vehicles, an Alphard people mover, a Kia Sportage for his wife and a Prado.
The Prado only comes out on the weekend when they go to church....must be a wild carpark at that church. He has two small daughters and his wife so he doesn't need a large 4wd to navigate the local roads or transport his family. No boat or caravan to tow either. I just dont get why you need a large 4wd in the suburbs if there isn't a practical element to your reasoning.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on June 05, 2023, 06:22:25 pm
@EB
Some people think that they are safer in a 4WD or SUV. If you're driving a small sedan and you hit one of those you are likely to come off 2nd best?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on June 05, 2023, 06:44:16 pm
Not many Kangaroos or off road tracks in my suburb GTC.
Bloke next door to me has three vehicles, an Alphard people mover, a Kia Sportage for his wife and a Prado.
The Prado only comes out on the weekend when they go to church....must be a wild carpark at that church. He has two small daughters and his wife so he doesn't need a large 4wd to navigate the local roads or transport his family. No boat or caravan to tow either. I just dont get why you need a large 4wd in the suburbs if there isn't a practical element to your reasoning.
Each to their own.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on June 05, 2023, 06:46:04 pm
@EB
Some people think that they are safer in a 4WD or SUV. If you're driving a small sedan and you hit one of those you are likely to come off 2nd best?
I get that Cookie but its a vicious cycle then of everyone having to own one to feel safe......and so we all have to have a Borderline truck like a RAM to be safer than the rest. This the American way of life creeping into Aus and I hate it.....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on June 05, 2023, 06:54:09 pm
I get that Cookie but its a vicious cycle then of everyone having to own one to feel safe......and so we all have to have a Borderline truck like a RAM to be safer than the rest. This the American way of life creeping into Aus and I hate it.....

I'm with you!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on June 24, 2023, 01:43:56 pm
There is quite a lot of irony surfacing in Green Energy / No Carbon / Low Carbon circles these days, intentions get exposed.

Major renewable groups are starting to realise the folly of putting all the eggs into one basket, and the futility of replacing mining for coal or oil with mining for rare earths and lithium, ultimate we can't survive on the difference.

I sat through an online seminar recently on geothermal, which was followed up by a Q&A session. Inevitably that spawned a series of media articles that have appeared on various websites, podcasts and forums. It's not lost on me that many of the geothermal naysayers turn out to be advocates for the Solar PV industry, people that masquerade as being about saving the planet, but that have actions suggesting they are about saving a bank balance!

It's even more ironic for people in Victoria, as coal shuts down Victoria is pretty much completely ignoring Australia's best geothermal sources right under the very coal deposits they no longer wish to mine. Base load energy that would have avoided the coming summer blackouts and excess heat deaths. Instead more solar, and more batteries, with more mines I expect to dig up and supply the raw materials!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on August 17, 2023, 11:16:29 pm
I'm not sure if this is tragic or funny but I'll post it anyway, as brutish as it may be!

I read today an ambit claim that peak veganism has past, with the demise or pending demise of several fake meat companies, but why post that here?

Because fake meat has been touted as a cure for climate change, apparently all those cows and sheep emit shed loads of methane and CO2, we have to cut the herds back, and so "fake meat" really is a thing!

But perhaps all is not lost, because one very observant individual has seemingly found the solution for all those herd related methane and C02 emissions, and he posed it as a simple question.

"Why the feck don't we just eat em!" vegans everywhere immediately imploded!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: PaulP on August 18, 2023, 09:55:01 am
Hmmm. Whether intended humorously or not, the above post is rather odd. As I’m sure you know Pat, the environmental damage is well and truly done by the time you eat the animal.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on August 18, 2023, 10:06:54 am
The environmental damage problem is a simple equation. There are more humans on earth than earth can sustainably cater for the way we currently live, work, play and eat.

We've started with the consumer, but realistically that's the symptom not the problem.

Every time you go somewhere the theme is crowded and busy and expensive. 

Over population is the issue, we can remove a lot of our waste and thats a noble intention but realistically we have grown exponentially over the last 100 years and consume more per head than we ever have before.  Where historically people need shelter they have multiple homes with rental income.  The family doesn't have one or two cars to make life efficient, they own one each.  There may be a holiday home or a city home and a country home.  There's multiple TV's, tablets, laptops and computers rather than the family one that gets used by all.

We have a new phone every couple of years because the software is no longer rolled out for older models.

Every facet of your life you will see has "necessitites" that are nice to haves or wants rather than needs and it's all designed to put money in some corporations pocket.

Now all that being said, none of us want to give up any of these modern day conveniences but we may need to think hard about these things moving forward.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on August 18, 2023, 11:14:07 am
The environmental damage problem is a simple equation. There are more humans on earth than earth can sustainably cater for the way we currently live, work, play and eat.

We could fix that problem fairly easily.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on August 18, 2023, 12:48:03 pm
Hmmm. Whether intended humorously or not, the above post is rather odd. As I’m sure you know Pat, the environmental damage is well and truly done by the time you eat the animal.
Yes it was light-hearted, I think the assertion was you eat them but don't replace them.

But on a more serious note, there are issues with the green accounting. For example, the removal of livestock doesn't mean that spot in the ecosphere won't be populated by some other mammal, and particularly here in Australia where kangaroo and wombat populations swing wildly to match the available boom or bust resource cycle. The assertion seems to be that native animals do not count in the CO2 budget as they are not human induced carbon emissions, but they are still a CO2 source basically scaling dependant on biomass. The key figure then is the differential between livestock and wildlife, on the carbon budget it's not as much as the figures suggest, however there is a clear benefit to removal of hoofed breeds on the Australian environment as we already know.

So while I ponder a buffalo fillet from my local pub, US Buffalo where numbers are skyrocketing under 1st nations commercialisation, I have to wonder why we don't eat kangaroo ahead of sheep, chicken or beef and set it up as a native license industry?

My own perspective on this is everything in moderate ratios relative to cost, cost which includes environmental and financial considerations, and a cost can be loss of jobs not just cost to produce or cost to the environment. It is not and never will be an all or nothing debate like the End Oil people, who in their extreme are possible just as damaging as inverse concerns. Extremism is a circle, go far enough left or right and you meet in the middle.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on August 18, 2023, 02:49:26 pm
I love me some Kangaroo and would happily eat it more often if it was more readily available.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on August 18, 2023, 04:58:46 pm
I love me some Kangaroo and would happily eat it more often if it was more readily available.
Our local butcher supplies lean kangaroo, I believe it's either low or zero cholesterol, and is terrific cooked like eye fillet rare or medium rare, you can use it to make a lean spectacular low and slow Saag Roo curry, a dish that often uses goat, mutton or other strong gamey meats.

But because of various agendas he has to keep it off display and is an ask for it only menu item, which unfortunately some people only feed to their pets!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on August 18, 2023, 05:14:40 pm
Our local butcher supplies lean kangaroo, I believe it's either low or zero cholesterol, and is terrific cooked like eye fillet rare or medium rare, you can use it to make a lean spectacular low and slow Saag Roo curry, a dish that often uses goat, mutton or other strong gamey meats.

But because of various agendas he has to keep it off display and is an ask for it only menu item, which unfortunately some people only feed to their pets!

My wife buys some kangaroo mince for the dogs, everytime she does i ask where is my kangaroo....perhaps i need to get myself in the dog house to get it?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on August 18, 2023, 06:22:04 pm
While I don't dispute that ruminants produce methane and, thus, contribute to carbon in the atmosphere and, hence, climate change, I'm not sure that their contribution is as dire as some vegans would have us believe. 

Ruminants include cattle, bison, buffalo, yak, gaur, antelope, deer, giraffe, okapi, sheep (domestic and wild species) and goats (domestic and wild species). Camels (including the South American llamas, etc) are pseudoruminants and don't produce as much methane as true ruminants. Most non-ruminant herbivores like horses and zebra produce methane but in more modest amounts.  Other non-ruminant herbivores, like elehants and hippopotamus, produce enormous amounts of methane because of the vast quantities of methane they consume.

Vast migratory herds of methane producing herbivores roamed every continent except Australia and Antarctica until they were either slaughtered by humans or replaced in part by domesticated or semi-domesticated versions of the original herbivores.  I don't think that I have ever seen a study that compares pre- and post-agricultural herbivore numbers and the relative quantities of methane produced by domesticated and wild herbivores.

Eat less meat because it's good for the planet seems to me to be an unscientific attempt to force a vegan diet on naturally omnivorous humanity. 

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on August 18, 2023, 08:15:16 pm
Eat less meat because it's good for the planet seems to me to be an unscientific attempt to force a vegan diet on naturally omnivorous humanity.
The way society is heading, I think the above slightly adjusted version is probably the most relevant!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on August 18, 2023, 09:34:23 pm
The way society is heading, I think the above slightly adjusted version is probably the most relevant!

In fact, it should be waste less!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 04, 2023, 01:30:43 pm
Not sure what to make out of the current debates around COP28, if I take anything out of this it is probably that the politics of reporting is dragging us all into the mire!

In summary the reporting seems to be;

 - It's only green if it's my green, your green doesn't count.

 - One solution fits all, my solution.

 - It's everybody else's fault.

 - No matter what is really happening around the globe, don't mention the "N" word.

Because the various green solutions are all cutting each other's throat trying to be the big player in the town, "N" is now back fairly and squarely in the plans from all the big economies. It will screw a country like us over, because we'll develop renewable technologies that need export scale sales to make ends meet, and there will be no major economy market left to sell them to!

If China, USA, Germany(EU), Japan and India go "N", it's pretty much the death knell for every local major green energy technology initiative I know of!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 04, 2023, 03:00:17 pm
Not sure what to make out of the current debates around COP28, if I take anything out of this it is probably that the politics of reporting is dragging us all into the mire!

In summary the reporting seems to be;

 - It's only green if it's my green, your green doesn't count.

 - One solution fits all, my solution.

 - It's everybody else's fault.

 - No matter what is really happening around the globe, don't mention the "N" word.

Because the various green solutions are all cutting each other's throat trying to be the big player in the town, "N" is now back fairly and squarely in the plans from all the big economies. It will screw a country like us over, because we'll develop renewable technologies that need export scale sales to make ends meet, and there will be no major economy market left to sell them to!

If China, USA, Germany(EU), Japan and India go "N", it's pretty much the death knell for every local major green energy technology initiative I know of!
Too late...China have 21 new Nuke Power Stations underway or semi completed and India are second place with around eight.
China will more than likely have to build our Nuke plants if we ever went that way given we would need infrastructure upgrades as well as multiple plant builds unless overseas companies like Brookfield stump up the money along with Cannon-Brookes and the like. With more Greens, Teal's and minor parties likely entering Parliament its unlikely though we would see Nuclear in Australia in the near to medium future..however with increased migration and push to grow the population its going to put more pressure on energy resources and with Natural Gas on nose in some states I cant see how a already stressed power grid system will cope with the extra load and even with upgrades/fixes the prices will only go up and make life harder for most unless we get a Government who will bite the bullet with Nuclear and risk political demise.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 04, 2023, 03:20:20 pm
................. I cant see how a already stressed power grid system will cope with the extra load and even with upgrades/fixes the prices will only go up and make like harder for most unless we get a Government who will bite the bullet with Nuclear and risk political demise.
Yep, for me it looks like we want to be selective with our learnings from recent history, we've completely discounted the farce that is the EU Energy grid and we are barrelling head long into crazy high energy prices.

The last time I was in the EU, I had a trip covering towns in France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and Austria. There were places where you could stand in one town and stare across a valley at another town paying 1800% more for it's energy.

I think when the subsidies go, the real subsidies not just the ones called a subsidy, things are really going to hit the fan.

Climate change is real, but there is no need to cut your own legs off to make things better!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 04, 2023, 03:30:46 pm
Yep, for me it looks like we want to be selective with our learnings from recent history, we've completely discounted the farce that is the EU Energy grid and we are barrelling head long into crazy high energy prices.

The last time I was in the EU, I had a trip covering towns in France, Belgium, Germany and Austria. There were places where you could stand in one town and stare across a valley at another town paying 1800% more for it's energy.

I think when the subsidies go, the real subsidies not the ones called a subsidy, things are really going to hit the fan.

Climate change is real, but there is no need to cut your own legs off to make things better!
China pulled the subsidies on EV's and now they have paddocks of dumped worthless EV's as the public, taxi companies etc dumped cars that were only viable with Government assistance.
You could argue that some EU countries have a developed Nuclear system/grid but it hasnt led to utopia on the energy front and that the frameworks of the economy in those countries have more affect on prices than the cost of power generation.
Bit like a football team.....no use the forward line kicking goals if you are leaking more in the backline.....
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 04, 2023, 03:33:51 pm
You want the public to be in favour of Nuclear, simply limit the power we are currently supplying.
A few rolling brown outs sold us 'we cant keep up with demands' and people will jump ship pretty quickly.

Unless it directly effects people, its too easy for them to turn a bline eye.

Force it into the publics face and miracles will happen.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 04, 2023, 03:41:42 pm
Force it into the publics face and miracles will happen.
This is exactly what happened in places like Germany and Japan, but why must we repeat the same mistakes, can't we learn without experiencing the pain?

Worse still, the pain gave rise to a new generation of political radicals, the toll from that will potentially end up costing far more than any thing we can debate about energy! There is a rising level of apathy and anarchy in these countries, with more and more of the population under fiscal duress, the disaffected are going to be the next generation of politicians.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 04, 2023, 03:44:11 pm
This is exactly what happened in places like Germany and Japan, but why must we repeat the same mistakes, can't we learn without experiencing the pain?

Worse still, the pain gave rise to a new generation of political radicals, the toll from that will potentially end up costing far more than any thing we can debate about energy! There is a rising level of apathy and anarchy in these countries, with more and more of the population under fiscal duress, the disaffected are going to be the next generation of politicians.

Its human nature.....but more so, its aussie culture.

'She'll be right'.......until its not.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 04, 2023, 03:53:02 pm
Its human nature.....but more so, its aussie culture.

'She'll be right'.......until its not.
Because they are struggling to make ends meet people are already making choices between food, heating, cooling, medical and socialising. If we get a heatwave and rolling blackouts it's a huge threat, especially if it's unpredicted and not managed, like a severe storm at just the wrong time.

Too many of the elderly already sit in front of electric fans without air conditioners or heaters, the power goes the fans stop, but the money they didn't have to spend on energy is lost anyway because the fridge and the freezer stop as well, the consequences are catastrophic to those who can least afford it.

The do-gooders will have you believe the price of renewables is just an inconvenience for a hot day or two, but far from it, it's not a price we have to pay and we don't have to punish societies most vulnerable for the sins or ignorance of the past. We can reduce CO2, and we do not have to do it through renewables.

As NSW and Vic shutdown the coal and gas, will residents there turn off the lights to keep SA safe and cool?

I read articles recently that pumped up SA and Tas as landmark examples of energy production, 90% of "SA produced energy" was from renewables, Tas was at 71% of it's "produced energy" being renewable, the problem is over the analysis period they consumed about 250% of what they produced, the balance to keep the lights on came via Vic or NSW from gas(And I assume some coal but I'm sure there is creative accounting!), there are stats and then there are stats!

Finally, the world doesn't care about us, we only become an example when they want us to be, we are a blip on the ocean, barely registering. Yet security wise the USA and UK know exactly what is at stake. Outside of China, Australia is the game for long term resources for energy and rare earths, unless of course we allow Brazil to scrape the Amazon bare of life. China in the meantime is playing dirty, we apparently use child indigenous labour to dig up our rare earths, and pollute and destroy the Great Barrier Reef with the tailings. Of course nobody in power believes it, but that doesn't matter because it is what voters believe that counts. Before long, there be more deals like Dan's Belt and Road, you can see it coming!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on December 05, 2023, 05:55:54 pm
Read this today:
An example of ‘net zero’ madness
This is a Tesla battery. It takes up all of the space under the passenger compartment of the car.
To manufacture it you need:
--12 tons of rock for Lithium
-- 5 tons of Cobalt minerals
-- 3 tons of mineral for nickel
-- 12 tons of copper ore
You must move 250 tons of soil to obtain:
-- 12 kg of Lithium
-- 30 pounds of nickel
-- 22 kg of manganese
-- 15 pounds of Cobalt
To manufacture the battery requires:
-- 100 Kg of RAM chips
-- 200 kg of aluminum, steel and/or plastic
The Caterpillar 994A is used for the earthmoving to obtain the essential minerals. It consumes 264 gallons of diesel in 12 hours.
Finally you get a “zero emissions” car.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 05, 2023, 06:06:36 pm
Jeremy Clarkson has been banging on about that for over a decade.

None of that takes into account the emmisions from shipping it from all parts of the world as well.
Lithium mines to manufacturing to production to end user.

All to make people feel better about themselves.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 05, 2023, 10:36:17 pm
Jeremy Clarkson has been banging on about that for over a decade.

None of that takes into account the emmisions from shipping it from all parts of the world as well.
Lithium mines to manufacturing to production to end user.

All to make people feel better about themselves.
And to top it off, it's relatively wealthy types buying Tesla's, and they are scrapping relatively new cars made from tonnes of recently mined resources that could have run for another decade or two more. Many of the same people update their car every 3 to 5 years, while the break-even figures assume you buy the Tesla and drive it to destruction.

I've even had someone arrogantly argue the aged Teslas will be passed down the economic chain benefitting those who can't initially afford them, but doesn't that mean the new car buyer never breaks even? I suspect unless they end with decades of invalid care they probably pass in deficit!

That's the feel good green for you, perhaps it's pseudogreen!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on December 06, 2023, 08:07:05 am
Jeremy Clarkson has been banging on about that for over a decade.

None of that takes into account the emmisions from shipping it from all parts of the world as well.
Lithium mines to manufacturing to production to end user.

All to make people feel better about themselves.

Now come on, K, tell me you didn't write this with a wry grin, tongue in cheek and a wink of the eye. Quoting Clarkson, a self-confessed boofhead, as an environmental guru is a stretch.

And I don't think you can blanket everyone who goes EV in their vehicle choice as wanting to feel better about themselves. There are a variety of motives, some altruistic, some egocentric, some just wanting to check it out and some wanting to appease some deep seated, unconscious guilt... etc.

The moment huge bucks from big hitting individuals and businesses started being invested in alternative energy sources, it ceased to be about environmentalism and started being about making copious amounts of loot; discovering a new healthy revenue source. Economics/loot rule.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 06, 2023, 08:30:44 am
Now come on, K, tell me you didn't write this with a wry grin, tongue in cheek and a wink of the eye. Quoting Clarkson, a self-confessed boofhead, as an environmental guru is a stretch.
In fairness to Clarkson, he might well be a boofhead, but he isn't a fool either. What he mostly rallies against is the public being conned by the very economic forces you discuss, and personally it aligns with much of my own perspective. What we here call green is somebody else's choking mess.

Our Australian version of green is very NIMBY, we offload the filthy aspects to China, Taiwan, India, Malyasia or Vietnam, etc, etc.. Then we sit here watching the 6 O'Clock news tut tutting at the smog and pollution in Asian cities, on our sparkling dazzling freshly solar powered big screen TV's while our EV gets a load of juice, all from the solar panels, extrusions, controllers, inverters and cabling delivered to us via the smog inducing mills in the very same countries we wag our finger at.

As for the geopolitical situation, we buy Subs to keep "the enemy" at bay, in the meantime we sell them cheap coal by the ship load to keep them running (making solar panels and TVs for us to buy) while they build nuclear power stations to set them free of that market dependency, while our own politicians count the short term cash and do nothing for the future.

You would think if the place that makes the bulk of the solar panels, and can by definition install them cheaper than any other location in the world, would find them to be so cost effective that building trillion$ of nuclear power stations would be redundant, ...................... and yet! Because here, solar is "So cost effective" that nothing can compete, apparently we have billionaires here preparing to clad the top end with SolarPV and power SE Asia, yet there were they make the stuff they build nuclear, .............. something seems NQR!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 06, 2023, 09:06:22 am
And to top it off, it's relatively wealthy types buying Tesla's, and they are scrapping relatively new cars made from tonnes of recently mined resources that could have run for another decade or two more. Many of the same people update their car every 3 to 5 years, while the break-even figures assume you buy the Tesla and drive it to destruction.

I've even had someone arrogantly argue the aged Teslas will be passed down the economic chain benefitting those who can't initially afford them, but doesn't that mean the new car buyer never breaks even? I suspect unless they end with decades of invalid care they probably pass in deficit!

That's the feel good green for you, perhaps it's pseudogreen!
Most people buying Tesla's will be using the generous Government subsidies and obtaining(not buying) them on novated leases through employers. Not sure on how passing EV's down the food chain will work either as I cant see how the second hand market will work with a lot of those EV's being in need or close to needing new batteries which are not cheap plus who will want to fork out for an EV with old technology with less range than the new variety.
I can also see EV's being a lot cheaper at the bottom end of the market with the Chinese auto companies like BYD, MG, GWM, Chery controlling the market and being able to knock out cheaper cars given they also have investments in the battery technology in many cases ie BYD provide Tesla with batteries and cars at that end of the market of the Chinese variety plummet in resale value.
We may have a lot of worthless EV's and recycling/disposing of batteries etc may become another issue and cost.
In China as soon as the Government subsidies stopped EV's were just dumped on mass like I have said before....
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2023-china-ev-graveyards/#:~:text=China's%20Abandoned%2C%20Obsolete%20Electric%20Cars,with%20unwanted%20battery%2Dpowered%20vehicles.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 06, 2023, 10:24:23 am
With all that being said, (and I am no EV booster, just pointing out the logical fallousies that exist) does manufacturing ICE cars, and pulling oil out of the ground not require similar amounts of effort and the odd disaster from an oil slick cause similar issues?

Is it possible that the manufacturing processes and cost are as probelematic and costly as each other, and ergo, the running of an EV vs an ICE car, actually yield some ecological benefit?

That being said, im not convinced either way, but many of these arguments are one sided which makes it really difficult.  Its possible that once manufactured, the ecological impact of the EV decrease to a point to offset any issues in manufacturing and you need good data for that, including how the electricity is produced to power the EV.  If you charge off solar, and then run it for 10 years, vs a petrol powered car, you have additional ongoing environmental impacts in the car industry to also consider even if the manufacturing process is initially in deficit. 

I think there is likely a better solution out there, but we will find out in due course.


Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 06, 2023, 11:51:13 am
With all that being said, (and I am no EV booster, just pointing out the logical fallousies that exist) does manufacturing ICE cars, and pulling oil out of the ground not require similar amounts of effort and the odd disaster from an oil slick cause similar issues?

Is it possible that the manufacturing processes and cost are as probelematic and costly as each other, and ergo, the running of an EV vs an ICE car, actually yield some ecological benefit?

That being said, im not convinced either way, but many of these arguments are one sided which makes it really difficult.  Its possible that once manufactured, the ecological impact of the EV decrease to a point to offset any issues in manufacturing and you need good data for that, including how the electricity is produced to power the EV.  If you charge off solar, and then run it for 10 years, vs a petrol powered car, you have additional ongoing environmental impacts in the car industry to also consider even if the manufacturing process is initially in deficit. 

I think there is likely a better solution out there, but we will find out in due course.

A Facebook post is probably a tad less one-sided than anything that comes out of Jeremy Clarkson's mouth  ::)

A fairly independent appraisal of some of the myths about EVs can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

For example:

FACT: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing.

Some studies have shown that making a typical EV can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. Still, over the lifetime of the vehicle, total GHG emissions associated with manufacturing, charging, and driving an EV are typically lower than the total GHGs associated with a gasoline car. That’s because EVs have zero tailpipe emissions and are typically responsible for significantly fewer GHGs during operation (see Myth 1 above).

For example, researchers at Argonne National Laboratory estimated emissions for both a gasoline car and an EV with a 300-mile electric range. In their estimates, while GHG emissions from EV manufacturing and end-of-life are higher, total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.


That's pretty close to your logic Thry.

It's claimed that 98% of each EV is now being recycled, but I haven't verified that.  I imagine that a similar percentage would apply to ICE vehicles, but then there's the energy required to recycle both.

I'm still not convinced that EVs, in their current form, are the future but I have no doubt that they are preferable to ICE vehicles in terms of GHG emissions.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 06, 2023, 01:29:53 pm
Now come on, K, tell me you didn't write this with a wry grin, tongue in cheek and a wink of the eye. Quoting Clarkson, a self-confessed boofhead, as an environmental guru is a stretch.

And I don't think you can blanket everyone who goes EV in their vehicle choice as wanting to feel better about themselves. There are a variety of motives, some altruistic, some egocentric, some just wanting to check it out and some wanting to appease some deep seated, unconscious guilt... etc.

The moment huge bucks from big hitting individuals and businesses started being invested in alternative energy sources, it ceased to be about environmentalism and started being about making copious amounts of loot; discovering a new healthy revenue source. Economics/loot rule.

The point about clarkson is exactly that though.
People don't need to be part of Mensa or deep within the industry to understand when the wool is being pulled over your eyes.
If someone of his 'record' is all over it, then the fact the average punter doesn't know and/or understand this, shows the propoganda that has been pushed onto everyone is working.

As for the reasons you listed....are majority of them not based upon people wanted to feel better about themselves?

People don't buy teslas because of their performance.
People don't buy teslas because of their history
People don't buy teslas because of their looks.
People buy teslas because they are teslas and that 'means' they are conscious of what that branded represents (albeit inaccurately) that they are green and better for the environment.

There's nothing wrong with it....apart from the fact that it is 'not as advertised' when you dig into it.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 06, 2023, 01:45:28 pm
A Facebook post is probably a tad less one-sided than anything that comes out of Jeremy Clarkson's mouth  ::)

A fairly independent appraisal of some of the myths about EVs can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

For example:

FACT: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing.

Some studies have shown that making a typical EV can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. Still, over the lifetime of the vehicle, total GHG emissions associated with manufacturing, charging, and driving an EV are typically lower than the total GHGs associated with a gasoline car. That’s because EVs have zero tailpipe emissions and are typically responsible for significantly fewer GHGs during operation (see Myth 1 above).

For example, researchers at Argonne National Laboratory estimated emissions for both a gasoline car and an EV with a 300-mile electric range. In their estimates, while GHG emissions from EV manufacturing and end-of-life are higher, total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.


That's pretty close to your logic Thry.

It's claimed that 98% of each EV is now being recycled, but I haven't verified that.  I imagine that a similar percentage would apply to ICE vehicles, but then there's the energy required to recycle both.

I'm still not convinced that EVs, in their current form, are the future but I have no doubt that they are preferable to ICE vehicles in terms of GHG emissions.

A couple of things.

I'm not sure anyone has explicitly said that EV cars are worse for the environment over their lifetime.

Plenty have said the logic that these cars are green is incorrect.
From your link, it shows that the manufacturing of these cars does actually cause more GHGs than traditional cars (which is the point being made consistently).

Its also assumed that a lot of the energy used to charge these vehicles (the fuel) comes from green sources (study is based on american power, rather here), which will have a big effect on how green they are over the lifetime of the vehicle.

It also doesn't take into account the end of life costs that would be more involved with recycling batteries etc.

I'm not against the idea, i'm against the marketing/propaganda/misdirection involved when talking about how 'green' it is.

Not sure it takes into account the costs (GHG and otherwise) of building all the charging stations that are required either.

Its far from a perfect solution.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Gointocarlton on December 06, 2023, 02:34:16 pm
I like EV's, just not the ones that spontaneously combust like the cement tanker on the West Gate the other day. Oh wait...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on December 06, 2023, 03:26:32 pm

As for the reasons you listed....are majority of them not based upon people wanted to feel better about themselves?

People don't buy teslas because of their performance.
People don't buy teslas because of their history
People don't buy teslas because of their looks.
People buy teslas because they are teslas and that 'means' they are conscious of what that branded represents (albeit inaccurately) that they are green and better for the environment.


Oh contraire... I only know two people who've bought a Tesla, however, both did so for the phenomenal 0-100kms... under 3 seconds!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 06, 2023, 05:42:26 pm
Oh contraire... I only know two people who've bought a Tesla, however, both did so for the phenomenal 0-100kms... under 3 seconds!

There is no shortage of electric vehicles out there that can perform that task.....and plenty of them look a whole lot better than a tesla.

Buying the brand Tesla for speed is like buying a holden for speed, when there are ferraris available.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on December 06, 2023, 05:48:38 pm
Krudds, are you sure people don’t buy Teslas for the performance ?
They go like cut cats !
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on December 06, 2023, 05:58:34 pm
Krudds, are you sure people don’t buy Teslas for the performance ?
They go like cut cats !

All electric cars do though. Why buy a tesla when you can get other electric cars like BMW or a Porche or an audi which are all quicker and look a hell of a lot better looking.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on December 06, 2023, 06:28:52 pm
All electric cars do though. Why buy a tesla when you can get other electric cars like BMW or a Porche or an audi which are all quicker and look a hell of a lot better looking.

It's called consumer choice. Many folks choose a quick (ICE) Audi over a quick BMW, or Jag, or Merc... etc.

Some folks just prefer the original in the case of the Tesla. And so what? Over time, unless Tesla's keep up, other EV brands (for quickness) will be chosen.

One of the two guys I know chose a Tesla because it also came with a V8 sound! Others are catching up with that now.

Labelling all Tesla drivers as being self-interested is no different to labelling all BMW drivers as wankers, or all Merc drivers as snobs, or all Jag drivers as ponces, or all Volvo drivers as architects, or all Commodore SS drivers as bogans... etc...
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on December 06, 2023, 07:11:44 pm
I like EV's, just not the ones that spontaneously combust like the cement tanker on the West Gate the other day. Oh wait...

That doesn’t get anywhere near the attention it should.

There was a photograph of an EV that spontaneously combusted in a car park (QLD?) recently and took out the five cars parked around it.

The EV boosters never mention the risk of Lithium battery fires.

My camper trailer has two AGM batteries and, with my portable solar panels, I can be off-grid  indefinitely.  Several folk with the same camper trailer are replacing the AGM batteries with much smaller, lighter and more efficient Lithium batteries … but not this little black duck!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 06, 2023, 07:27:24 pm
All electric cars do though. Why buy a tesla when you can get other electric cars like BMW or a Porche or an audi which are all quicker and look a hell of a lot better looking.
Because if you dont have big money those luxury brands dont sit under the threshold like Tesla does for the EV Subsidies.....I think BMW have one car that does and its not as quick as the Tesla's off the mark.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on December 07, 2023, 01:25:17 am
I haven’t driven an electric car.
I sat in an acquaintances Tesla last week and made “broom broom” noises.
It seemed pretty well built, it’s the second Tesla the guy has had, this one was the model Y (I think) it was a sort of suv looking one.
He’s got solar on his roof for recharging, loves the car.
It’s 12 months old with 14k km on it, still smells new.
I was surprised at how small the front boot was though.
If I had solar I’d look at buying one until I remembered what a toerag Mr Musk is.
On balance I think he’s got a pretty good product.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 07, 2023, 08:58:26 am
There is always the "over the lifetime", "lifetime" or "anticipated lifetime" clause in those EV arguments.

The remaining lifetime of the car the EV replaced, the remaining lifetime of the EV when it is replaced, the replacement interval, how many vehicles make it to the anticipated lifetime or if the anticipated lifetime is realistic at all (It seems some are unnaturally shortened while others are unrealistically long)!

EVs are piling up in California unrepaired, so much so a whole industry has grown that guts and converts the system components for retrofit into classic car bodies. The problem is the insurers won't risk repairs to them even from relatively minor collisions, so relatively trivial damage is a write-off. Like the ever growing pile of redundant SolarPV panels filling warehouses around our capital cities. Anticipated life!

That is where the claims all unravel, it's another "Don't mention the war!" moment!

The same frauds and charlatans that run oil and energy also run the bulk of EV, the cars are built by the same conglomerates, using the same manufacturing technologies, in factories built by largely the same group of engineers.

Then you add average weight to the vehicle, and yet apparently tyres last longer, and the roads don't wear out faster, roads paid for by fuel taxes they don't have to pay for anyway, everybody else is subsidising them! "Don't mention the war!"

Until the industries that fed society fess up to the problems, nothing is really going to change as we are just putting a new wrapper on the same old problems.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 07, 2023, 09:06:56 am
The advantage of Tesla is that its all American manufactured and owned. 

The rest are all reliant on Chinese manufacturing. 

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Baggers on December 07, 2023, 09:12:22 am
I haven’t driven an electric car.
I sat in an acquaintances Tesla last week and made “broom broom” noises.
It seemed pretty well built, it’s the second Tesla the guy has had, this one was the model Y (I think) it was a sort of suv looking one.
He’s got solar on his roof for recharging, loves the car.
It’s 12 months old with 14k km on it, still smells new.
I was surprised at how small the front boot was though.
If I had solar I’d look at buying one until I remembered what a toerag Mr Musk is.
On balance I think he’s got a pretty good product.

The Missus' company is transitioning to EVs and one of the chieftains already has a Tesla and one of the features he loves is the quietness which makes talking on the dogger and conversations within the car so much better.

Transitioning, dramatic transitioning, from one technology to another is always a challenge with its fair share of difficulties and troubles along the way before the kinks are ironed out and the benefits become apparent. Horses to cars, farmland to industry (industrial revolution), landline to mobile phones and so on. Along the way we have humans who fear/resist change, are suspicious and cynical about change, then those who do a wait and see (probably me), those who are happy to experiment with change and those who love it. Horses for courses.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on December 07, 2023, 09:27:00 am
I’m with you Baggers 👍🏼
I am not a petrolhead, in fact read that as “not a car enthusiast”.
I don’t understand why boofheads like Clarkson rail so hard against the evil EV.
They go like the clappers, so if you like performance it’s there.
It seems like it’s the lack of sound pollution they don’t like but won’t say out loud… 🤣
I’ve read in the car thread here how much some of you like your noise, to me it’s baffling.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 07, 2023, 10:00:45 am
The advantage of Tesla is that its all American manufactured and owned. 

The rest are all reliant on Chinese manufacturing. 


I thought our Teslas in Aus are made in China?, batteries are also now made by BYD because they do them cheaper......
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on December 07, 2023, 10:06:02 am
GWM have recalled their ORA's....they tended to electrocute the owner when the charging cable was connected and then removed with the power on....not good for business😉
https://gizmodo.com.au/2023/12/gwm-ora-recalled-in-australia-due-to-risk-of-death/
You buy Chinese junk and you get what you pay for......Id be more keen on a hybrid of the japanese origin.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on December 07, 2023, 10:41:55 am
I thought our Teslas in Aus are made in China?, batteries are also now made by BYD because they do them cheaper......


Factories owned and operated by Tesla with cheap chinese labour.

Ultimately, they are ensuring that they don't go Chinese and thats approach.  Even the factories in China are American Owned.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on December 07, 2023, 12:54:35 pm
I thought our Teslas in Aus are made in China?, batteries are also now made by BYD because they do them cheaper......
Tesla subcontract a lot of the manufacture, their setup is very similar to Apple, but you won't hear any speak out about it because the legal penalties are horrendous and they have reputation of stomping on suppliers.

In some cases the subcontractors are owned and licensed by the country the factory is built in, whether it be making bodies, batteries or other components. Quite similar to the situation we had here with GM and the Fed funding.

As I understand it, when you say a company in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, etc., etc., is foreign owned, what that tends to mean it is a minority foreign ownership. To get a slot / license you have to have a majority shareholder who is indigenous. Just like Foxconn with Apple.

A lot of people have been calling for similar regulations here in Oz, so at least some of the profit stays where it was made!

Media sometimes confuse Owners / Board Member / Director with being an Executive Director, in Oz you need a locally based Director, but that Director is not necessarily a shareholder, they are just a well paid Executive with all the mandatory liabilities attached.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 08, 2024, 02:21:00 pm
My heart goes out to those in the flood affected areas, some have only just returned or are still yet to get back to homes affected by 2022 and they are getting whacked again.

I was chatting to a resident of one of the country towns expected to be hit again and he's furious, he told me the same group of people that protest against CO2 emissions and warn them about the effects of climate change also rolled up to actively protest against the building of a flood levy for their town after the 2011 floods, on environmental grounds, and many of the protestors now don't even live there but return to local debates from the city!

All the metro left greeny types achieve is to push marginal / regional groups towards the hard right, and it's not going to end well! If the people in regional cities abandon the land and it's supporting industries good luck to the greenies getting their vegan low carbon locally sourced mung beans, instead they'll be flown in via a United Airlines 767, from a bean farm in Sth America formerly known as the Amazon, and relabelled a Aussie Made because they are repackaged here by a China owned conglomerate that pay suburban dwellers insufficient wages to rent a house! In the interim the metro greenies go back to Prahran and sip an ethically sourced coffee, not a single sandbagging shovel to be found between the lot of them!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: DJC on January 09, 2024, 08:33:01 pm
A couple of points about levees.

First of all, levees don't prevent flooding.  They constrain river flows and cause more severe flooding where there aren't levees.  The recent Maribyrnong River floods and the Flemington race track levee is a classic example of that.  The water has to go somewhere.

Secondly, the Mitchell Shire Mayor was on the wireless this morning and was asked why the Shire decided not to proceed with the construction of more levees.  She explained that the Shire's cost-benefit analysis showed that the cost of constructing more levees far outweighed any benefits they may provide in the foreseeable future.  That is, the decision was made on purely financial grounds and not because of the bleating of the "metro left greeny types".   I reckon that the Mitchell Shire ratepayers who don't live on a floodplain would be pretty happy with the Shire's decision.

The bottom line is that infrastructure on flood plains will be subject to inundation regardless of how many dams and levees are constructed.  If stuff has to be built on floodplains, it should be flood-resilient at worst.  Retrofitting buildings to make them flood-resilient makes a lot more sense than building more and more levees.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on January 12, 2024, 01:59:21 pm
There seems to be a growing global anti-dam movement at the moment, I can't help but remain sceptical because it seems to be in direct response to vastly improving options for hydroelectric power generation, and of course some of the opposing groups are linked to renewable alternatives. Human social / political behaviours nearly always exposes vested interests.

Just as there is a lot of gibberish spoken about nuclear, gas and geothermal, a lot of gibberish is being spoken about dams. Especially regarding methane generation and release. The dumbed down claims are that dams increase methane production as they age, but it's a bogus claim built on a number of assumptions about anaerobic build up of bacteria in dams. To meet the numbers in the report the dams have to be located in very specific regions and have stable stagnant water levels for decades, typically tropical and full. The two main studies cited refer to dams (Actually in the study case old open cut mines from the 80s) in Malaysia and Brazil, the water in one wasn't even considered drinkable.

Almost three decades ago there was a major study in dam emissions, in particular looking into mitigation of anaerobic build up. The study found the solution was so simple, control the depth of water withdrawal giving the outflow some natural variability across the dam depth and greater than 90% of emissions cease because there will never be an anaerobic build up in the first place!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on January 12, 2024, 03:21:50 pm
Im yet to be convinced that gas doesnt have the best footprint of them all carbon wise.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on January 12, 2024, 07:04:12 pm
Im yet to be convinced that gas doesnt have the best footprint of them all carbon wise.
Taking excavation and transportation into account??
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on January 14, 2024, 12:07:53 am
Taking excavation and transportation into account??
yep
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 05, 2024, 08:13:23 am
I just sat through a panel discussion on the future of batteries as a limiting factor for the uptake of SolarPV, Wind and other "green energy" solutions. The panel was convened after one group correctly identified the growing threat to funding of renewables due to stalled progress on the battery front, primarily with increased interest in nuclear as a low / no carbon alternative, the writing must be on the wall surrounding some renewable and battery credentials if these groups are starting to talk about "the issues".

I was hoping to hear some discussions of innovations, instead I was shocked at the solution offered, it wasn't some new silicon or iron based battery, no far from it, they ignored many new technologies and went straight to the tried and true, pumped hydro!

The irony that these people would suddenly identify pumped hydro as a green energy solution, they even rephrased it as a "Water Battery!"

For years the very same SolarPV and Wind power groups have been telling us how evil hydro is, methane emission, environmental vandalism, loss of habitat, flooding, etc., etc., and yet the moment they feel renewable funding is being threatened by growing interest in base load alternatives they offer pumped hydro as "the battery solution" for renewables.

These people can't possible lay straight in bed, they must sleep all forked up, the whole event just exposes their true focus which is dollars not the environment!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on February 14, 2024, 03:08:31 pm
Here is one of the stories that really highlights the folly of some of the renewables being pushed.

The Port of Dover in the UK has set 2030 as the cut-off date to go completely electric, that means the Port, Ships and Ferries being serviced must be 100% electric by 2030. Seems reasonable, they already have two of the nine vessels as hybrids.

But wait, the devil is in the details.

The hybrids can only sail on electric for 40 minutes, and every minute of sailing is a minute of recharge time. The ships carry and consume 1.4MW of battery power to sail for 40 minutes. The rest of the journey generators on board kick in to supply electricity and recharge the batteries. Seems reasonable, at least the Ports are pollution free.

The vast bulk of the power consumed is for the ships, how much power is that, well just for the single Port of Dover each day they'll need about 180MW of ship energy, the Port itself can be regarded as negligible. And Dover is one of only three ports in the circuit servicing the UK and France (Dover, Calais and Dunkirk), each port needs the same 180MW per day, 560MW in total.

Per port that is about 1/3 of a medium to large scale coal fired power station, 50% of a 1GW power station in total, about a 1/4 of Victoria's Loy Yang A six(6) power unit solution just for those ports!

For reference, we closed the Alcoa smelters in Portland as being uneconomical, they consumed about 300MW and supplied a portion of their own power requirement.

180MW also happens to be about 3 to 4 times the total capacity of the supply lines coming into the Port of Dover in total! :o

Who justifies these numbers, what reality do they live in, are they thinking Wind and SolarPV for Zero Carbon? I ran the numbers and to power those Ports by SolarPV would require the SolarPV farm to cover an area of about 50km² (For comparison Melbourne CBD is 6.5km² ), so nearly eight Melbourne CBDs!

If you think that's a tough ask, now imagine the size of the recharging plug, and you think I'm joking! :o

Finally, think about a Port like Singapore, or even our lowly Port of Melbourne, many tens or even hundreds of times larger than the Dover terminal and powering much much bigger ships on much much longer journeys!

Before long we will be spitting out nuclear facilities like a Pez dispenser, it's inevitable.

PS: Coincidentally, I just found out 560MW powers about 330,000 homes, roughly the size of the current Victorian blackout!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: Thryleon on March 03, 2024, 10:25:54 pm
So I put down a deposit on a car yesterday.

I've gone conventional ICE. 

will likely be the last one we buy, but I read the room.  My 16 year old mondeo replaced for a vw arteon.  Was one of about 3 cars I could find in that size, shape with that sort of liftback that I actually liked.

I'm told it's the last one that dealer will sell.

The alternatives were all SUV or a lot smaller or much more expensive or similar priced and EV.  no solar at home made the choice easier as it meant charging on the grid or adding 20 grand to the cost of the car.

The mrs car is an SUV and we didn't want another. we'll probably know a lot more about cars and EVs vs hydrogen when it's time to replace her 2017 xtrail.

Hopefully that's minimum 7 years away and they can make newer cars better.  At least we'll know if EV is the way to go by then (or we'll have minimal choice).

In this discussion I had a thought the other day.  First ev I could think of was a prius.  You would think Toyota would have been at the forefront of EV given that factor.  Why did they elect to dump it?  Only answer I can come up with is the numbers dont work.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 04, 2024, 09:45:17 am
So I put down a deposit on a car yesterday.

I've gone conventional ICE. 

will likely be the last one we buy, but I read the room.  My 16 year old mondeo replaced for a vw arteon.  Was one of about 3 cars I could find in that size, shape with that sort of liftback that I actually liked.

I'm told it's the last one that dealer will sell.

The alternatives were all SUV or a lot smaller or much more expensive or similar priced and EV.  no solar at home made the choice easier as it meant charging on the grid or adding 20 grand to the cost of the car.

The mrs car is an SUV and we didn't want another. we'll probably know a lot more about cars and EVs vs hydrogen when it's time to replace her 2017 xtrail.

Hopefully that's minimum 7 years away and they can make newer cars better.  At least we'll know if EV is the way to go by then (or we'll have minimal choice).

In this discussion I had a thought the other day.  First ev I could think of was a prius.  You would think Toyota would have been at the forefront of EV given that factor.  Why did they elect to dump it?  Only answer I can come up with is the numbers dont work.



Punters are sticking on the fence and buying hybrids...SUVs are just jacked up cars usually on the same platforms. They have the same engines, use more fuel and are 25-30% dearer than a normal car but are seen as safer being higher on the road and have been a marketing dream for car
companies who are cashing in.
Toyota have moved away from EVs because they can't compete with the Chinese who dominate in that area, hence the love for Hydrogen..got nothing to do with the environment, saving the planet etc but all to do with money and having market share.Had a ride in my relations Haval Jolion recently and was pleasantly surprised, I'm no fan of Chinese manufactured items but the car was comfortable, ran well and the dual clutch auto meshed well with hybrid setup.
Can see why people are buying them and why you see dealerships everywhere.
They will dominate the Aus motor scene and it will be interesting to see how Toyota responds with both pricing, supply and quality of new vehicles.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on March 04, 2024, 11:41:29 am
Saw a Chinese Tank 4wd in a local carpark the other day. On just a cursory look over it I was too pleasantly surprised and formed a reasonably positive first impression.  Not sure how they drive etc.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 04, 2024, 01:15:28 pm
Toyota have moved away from EVs because they can't compete with the Chinese who dominate in that area, hence the love for Hydrogen..got nothing to do with the environment, saving the planet etc but all to do with money and having market share.
The main reason why companies like Toyota and Mercedes and BMW are looking towards EV alternatives is that the resource numbers do not stack up.

The Green economy pushes more and more EVs, Wind and Solar, but to achieve the equivalent of the current energy / transport system we have to increase the mining of copper, lithium and other rare earth elements more than tenfold. It's the elephant in the room nobody is talking about, and ultimately it will be why countries go nuclear to take advantage of existing infrastructure without requiring more copper resource.

A traditional ICE car uses at least 23kg of copper, an EV uses at least 80kg of copper. EVs are currently less than 10% of global vehicles yet they already consume as much as 30% of the available transport copper resource. So to get to anywhere near 100% of global vehicles requires a 300% increase in copper resources just for transport.

Renewables energy sectors are still a minority of global energy, but already the single biggest consumer of copper, already using about 3x more copper than the transport sector. That is just the renewable part, not including infrastructure like the grid.

I read estimates that for renewable SolarPV, Wind and EV to replace existing solutions will require between 500% and 1200% more copper mining globally. That assumes they can find that much resource, at the moment it doesn't exist.

Ultimately, the thing that might force societies hand, could well be kilograms of copper per kilowatt hour.

The USA just uncovered the world's biggest lithium resource, unfortunately it sits in deep salt brines under California's already limited water supply. But even as the world's single biggest resource it only covers about 45% of what the US predicts it will need, so the search goes on. Who and how they will mine that is whole other question, environmental groups are already protesting and it hasn't even started! Yet the same protesting groups demand we close coal and convert to SolarPV, they are obviously deliberately ambivalent to the reality of the limited resource situation, what they demand is a fantasy.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 04, 2024, 02:58:37 pm
Saw a Chinese Tank 4wd in a local carpark the other day. On just a cursory look over it I was too pleasantly surprised and formed a reasonably positive first impression.  Not sure how they drive etc.
The Tank is a bit of an exploration from GWM into the realm of Landcruiser territory but from what I read has ABS/front suspension issues which causes the vehicle to dip down at the front under heavy braking and the rear wheels lift up off the ground...wouldnt want to be towing anything when that happens 😲
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: cookie2 on March 04, 2024, 03:06:21 pm
The Tank is a bit of an exploration from GWM into the realm of Landcruiser territory but from what I read has ABS/front suspension issues which causes the vehicle to dip down at the front under heavy braking and the rear wheels lift up off the ground...wouldnt want to be towing anything when that happens 😲

Not so good!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 04, 2024, 03:28:36 pm
The main reason why companies like Toyota and Mercedes and BMW are looking towards EV alternatives is that the resource numbers do not stack up.

The Green economy pushes more and more EVs, Wind and Solar, but to achieve the equivalent of the current energy / transport system we have to increase the mining of copper, lithium and other rare earth elements more than tenfold. It's the elephant in the room nobody is talking about, and ultimately it will be why countries go nuclear to take advantage of existing infrastructure without requiring more copper resource.

A traditional ICE car uses at least 23kg of copper, an EV uses at least 80kg of copper. EVs are currently less than 10% of global vehicles yet they already consume as much as 30% of the available transport copper resource. So to get to anywhere near 100% of global vehicles requires a 300% increase in copper resources just for transport.

Renewables energy sectors are still a minority of global energy, but already the single biggest consumer of copper, already using about 3x more copper than the transport sector. That is just the renewable part, not including infrastructure like the grid.

I read estimates that for renewable SolarPV, Wind and EV to replace existing solutions will require between 500% and 1200% more copper mining globally. That assumes they can find that much resource, at the moment it doesn't exist.

Ultimately, the thing that might force societies hand, could well be kilograms of copper per kilowatt hour.

The USA just uncovered the world's biggest lithium resource, unfortunately it sits in deep salt brines under California's already limited water supply. But even as the world's single biggest resource it only covers about 45% of what the US predicts it will need, so the search goes on. Who and how they will mine that is whole other question, environmental groups are already protesting and it hasn't even started! Yet the same protesting groups demand we close coal and convert to SolarPV, they are obviously deliberately ambivalent to the reality of the limited resource situation, what they demand is a fantasy.
BYD own the battery market and other car companies cant compete and keep costs down down, its complete Chinese domination in the EV world for passenger vehicles and Toyota are admitting now they are targeting the commercial world for hydrogen sales. The Mirai has been a fail due to its high initial cost and lack of refuelling stations...in the USA where they sold around 2K odd they only have refuelling stations in California and they are only good for 50 refills a day each, not sure why those 2k folk bought a Mirai if you cant travel further than California?
Emission targets set by countries are creeping up to the stage where infrastructure will need to be in place to achieve those targets and most Governments seem to have chosen EV's as their preferred option where they can piggy back onto existing infrastructure and get joe average to help pay for the add ons required by forcing homeowners, passenger vehicle users to buy solar systems, chargers etc and slapping extra charges on power bills, registrations, council rates etc.
https://asiatimes.com/2023/03/its-time-for-toyota-to-rethink-its-hydrogen-strategy/
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 04, 2024, 10:20:34 pm
Emission targets set by countries are creeping up to the stage where infrastructure will need to be in place to achieve those targets and most Governments seem to have chosen EV's as their preferred option where they can piggy back onto existing infrastructure and get joe average to help pay for the add ons required by forcing homeowners, passenger vehicle users to buy solar systems, chargers etc and slapping extra charges on power bills, registrations, council rates etc.
https://asiatimes.com/2023/03/its-time-for-toyota-to-rethink-its-hydrogen-strategy/
There is a reason why massive factories are going up all over the globe for hydrogen transport, once the infrastructure is there to fill trucks the cars will follow, it's only a matter of time. Add to that France's recent hydrogen discovery, which can effectively fuel France and Germany combined for many decades to come, and I think longer term you'll see a change.

As for BYD, it's a very short term thing, the long term outlook for EV is rising cost as copper and rare earth become scarcer, while the current high / expensive cost of hydrogen options are all forecast to fall. If I was a BYD investor I'd be making the short term profit and bailing out before the shizen hits the fan. btw., On a recent OS trip, I had a close look at the new BYD's at a shopping centre promo, and cheap isn't how I'd describe them relative to the available options in the same region, to me the new Ionic still seemed to be better value.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on March 04, 2024, 10:38:09 pm
You’re still not addressing the hydrogen conversion costs LP.
I don’t care which tech “wins” but right now ev are ahead by the length of Flemington straight and that isn’t going to change in the next 10-20 years.
Battery’s will become cheaper, they will charge quicker and likely go farther, Hydrogen is a long, long way behind.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 05, 2024, 06:04:19 am
You’re still not addressing the hydrogen conversion costs LP.
I don’t care which tech “wins” but right now ev are ahead by the length of Flemington straight and that isn’t going to change in the next 10-20 years.
Battery’s will become cheaper, they will charge quicker and likely go farther, Hydrogen is a long, long way behind.
The cost per kilogram varies greatly with the source as you know, but regardless of the source it's user pays in the same way petrol or diesel is user pays, there won't be subsidies.

In the case of batteries history says otherwise, because the limits are laws of physics defining the ultimate energy density. This repeated claim of far greater energy densities is a fantasy, more energy basically means bigger heavier batteries, there are no miracles coming for lithium. The everyday experience of users on phones or laptops do not apply, the batteries haven't change much, the electronics has. The better analogy are power tool batteries, more AH means bigger batteries, more copper, more lithium.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on March 05, 2024, 08:12:45 am
You’re still not addressing the hydrogen conversion costs LP.
I don’t care which tech “wins” but right now ev are ahead by the length of Flemington straight and that isn’t going to change in the next 10-20 years.
Battery’s will become cheaper, they will charge quicker and likely go farther, Hydrogen is a long, long way behind.

The time frame is up for debate, but that's about it.

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. We can't run out.
It is cleaner than anything we currently run. The only problem is the conversion costs....which will be solved, just a matter of when. This is where the government needs to come in!

Alternatively, batteries are a temporary solution. Like oil, the materials are finite and it's just a matter of when they run out or when it is no longer financially viable to continue down that path......should be environmentally as well, but $s trump the environment as we all know.
Temporary might mean 20 years, but there is an end date stamped on it, but it's a changing date that we can somewhat control by our actions.

Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on March 05, 2024, 08:16:47 am
My understanding is that with ev you can buy or generate a KWh put it in your car and drive, that is your cost.
With Hydrogen you need 4-5 times the volume of electricity, that is its cost… currently.
It’s a long way behind.
Even if every petrol station in the country became a Hydrogen dispenser overnight, who would buy it at 4-5 times the cost of a volt ?
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 05, 2024, 12:35:23 pm
The only problem is the conversion costs....which will be solved, just a matter of when. This is where the government needs to come in!
Yes, it's the very same argument as SolarPV and Wind energy. There is irony in some green energy groups arguing against hydrogen subsidies, when they historically scaled up SolarPV and Wind off the back of government subsidies, the very same process will apply to the hydrogen economy and probably nuclear.

SolarPV and Wind have no high moral ground regarding infrastructure, at the moment they use a grid built and maintained by coal. Some of them have deals to avoid the full overhead contributions until beyond 2030, so they are hell bent on making a profit before the costs kick in.

Most of the arguments against hydrogen economy or other low or zero carbon alternatives are based on the politics of corporate greed, those who already have their hand in the lolly jar and refuse to share, it exposes just how disingenuous they are about zero carbon!

No matter what you hear or read, hydrogen and / or nuclear is eventually coming to a town near you, and the real race is to get those industries established and supporting the existing grid until fusion hits town. What does fusion run on, of course the answer is hydrogen or it's isotopes. That's the hydrogen economy of the future!

btw., What does SolarPV run on, we'll as far as I know that's hydrogen fusion courtesy of the sun!
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on March 05, 2024, 01:20:33 pm
My understanding is that with ev you can buy or generate a KWh put it in your car and drive, that is your cost.
With Hydrogen you need 4-5 times the volume of electricity, that is its cost… currently.
It’s a long way behind.
Even if every petrol station in the country became a Hydrogen dispenser overnight, who would buy it at 4-5 times the cost of a volt ?

Assuming your figures are correct, they are only correct based on current market and current technologies.

Look at it from both directions. Eventually, EVs and the materials required to make them, will become scarce and supply and demand dictates those costs will increase.

Alternatively, through more R+D, hydrogen costs will come down once better tech is worked out.

On top of that, governments can dictate which direction we go by adding subsidies or taxes for or against certain techs to bridge that gap further.

If you think the government is going to lose out on the money it gets on taxing fuel because people are shifting towards EV, you're not thinking it through. As has been suggested elsewhere, there will be additional taxes brought in eventually, potentially due to weights of vehicles and the damage it does on roads.....EVs would cop it, hydrogen would not.

People need to look at the end game in all of this, not just 5 years from now.
Hydrogen will not run out.
Everything else will run out before then.
Its in our best interests to do everything we can do to use Hydrogen as much as possible, sooner or later, 'big money' will realise this,
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: northernblue on March 05, 2024, 02:11:02 pm

btw., What does SolarPV run on, we'll as far as I know that's hydrogen fusion courtesy of the sun!

Who the hell cares ?
Stop twaffling!

Let’s just get those stinking, noisy, personal and global health hazard ice vehicles off the roads.
They should be consigned to the “What were we thinking ?” aisle of the national museum, not held up as some virtuous saviour of humanity.

And down the track if a better, cleaner energy than solar and battery storage comes along then that’s even better news.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 05, 2024, 02:34:45 pm
Its in our best interests to do everything we can do to use Hydrogen as much as possible, sooner or later, 'big money' will realise this,
The tech, the costs, the argy bargy are all largely irrelevant issues, the biggest hydrogen economy issue is something called hydrogen embrittlement.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: kruddler on March 05, 2024, 02:54:59 pm
The tech, the costs, the argy bargy are all largely irrelevant issues, the biggest hydrogen economy issue is something called hydrogen embrittlement.

You'd think that is somewhat solved since there are working cars out and about.
Time will tell.
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 05, 2024, 03:36:24 pm
https://sustainability.crugroup.com/article/energy-from-green-hydrogen-will-be-expensive-even-in-2050
Title: Re: The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread
Post by: LP on March 05, 2024, 04:07:56 pm
https://sustainability.crugroup.com/article/energy-from-green-hydrogen-will-be-expensive-even-in-2050
Is there is some irony in CRU arguing that Green Hydrogen is bad because SolarPV and Wind are intermittent sources for electrolysing water? Especially given CRU owns a division which is a specialist SolarPV technology consultancy, so they are hardly impartial on this issue.

I'm not going to tell anyone the future of green energy is going to be cheaper, it won't. In fact prices are already rising, this is despite all the unending claims of clean green and cheap. We have more low cost subsidised renewable energy than ever before, supposedly smashing the $/kwh rate, but tell that to many peoples recent power bills! The bill is the reality, forget all the claims.

btw., When people talk about hydrogen in steel making and chemical processing, it's not just about energy, it's required as a reductant / reagent in many industrial processes. At the moment steel mills and some chemical plants produce their own hydrogen by reformation, and green or blue hydrogen would see the carbon emissions slashed by 20% to 40% even without any other complimentary strategies.

No matter how some try to encourage a hydrogen ban, we are never going to stop making steel, fertilisers or medicines.

Finally, as an aside, a couple of years back a lobby group tried to ban nitrogen use in industry. Apparently nitrogen is the new carbon dioxide. I was involved in projects 3D printing metals using nitrogen gas. The gas we use is a waste by-product of companies making oxygen, argon and even some CO2 for drinks (beer / soft drinks). Nitrogen as a by-product is so cheap we can buy it at cubic meter pricing cheaper than air. All the nitrogen we use comes out of the air, and that is where 98% of it eventually heads back, some gets interstitially absorbed by the metals. Yet we were accused of adding to greenhouse gases, these protesters are fruit loops!