Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Deer in the Headlights (Read 39208 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #165 –
If other folk here have any interest in this topic, I'll let them be the judge of the respective quality of the commentary.

Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #166 –
Like many topics on this forum, it starts in earnest and descend quickly into ego based point scoring. Much like some of the characters in Bob Dylan's Desolation Row (Einstein and Robin Hood, Ezra Pound and TS Eliot), too much focus on minor points and details and losing sight of the bigger picture. We all want cleaner air, water and soil. We all want a host of other environmental improvements. Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #167 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.
Yes, sensible actions in the face of a potential risk. The key words being "action", which means do something, and "potential risk", which means something bad might happen!

The trouble is in Australia we have ScoMo in charge, who seems credulous regarding climate change denialism. ScoMo "Wants to Believe" the conspiracies, the real question is perhaps why?

Other Liberals like Turnbull and Abbott had motives that were relatively clear, be they hard right economics or the Small "L" conservatism.

Scotty from Marketing is a weather-vane, and not a very good one it seems because he can't definitively find his way-point! His lack of commitment perhaps presents the highest risk to Australia of all political positions, because we could lose on both fronts, the economy and the environment!

Some countries have chosen Filthy Rich while others choose Clean Broke, Scotty from Marketing seems to have found the secret 3rd path Filthy Broke!

Observers now probably suspect with Scotty from Marketing it's all about Scotty from Marketing, no wonder he idolizes Trump!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #168 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Like many topics on this forum, it starts in earnest and descend quickly into ego based point scoring. Much like some of the characters in Bob Dylan's Desolation Row (Einstein and Robin Hood, Ezra Pound and TS Eliot), too much focus on minor points and details and losing sight of the bigger picture. We all want cleaner air, water and soil. We all want a host of other environmental improvements. Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.

Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #169 –
Quote from: flyboy77 – on
Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.

I'd bet London to a brick that it's doable. Between the various forms of clean(er) energy, we can do way better than the current situation.

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #170 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I'd bet London to a brick that it's doable. Between the various forms of clean(er) energy, we can do way better than the current situation.
That is surely correct, once the political leverage from the old world is broken, in this regard the energy debate is very reminiscent of the electric car debate.

I do take issue with alarmist calls banning modern nuclear energy, it's clearly Australia's cleanest greenest fastest solution to both greenhouse emissions and base-load energy. Musk's batteries are probably filthy, just that they are manufactured NIMBY, and manufacturing wind turbines and solar cells full of rare earth elements is not that much better, but again they are made NIMBY. All three industries hang their hat on being cleaner and sustainable in the future without having a ready-made solution!

Lucky for us China's and India's pollution hasn't yet applied for a travel visa so it's stuck inside their borders, so we can keep importing our solar cells, wind turbines and storage batteries. All we have to do is dig everything up and ship it to them first to be converted and returned in a convenient to use package. Scotty from Marketing calls that "a trade deal", we can even have the stuff shipped in tightly packed parts to save on freight called "good economic management", then assemble the lot here called "Creating jobs!"

Nuclear is an almost perfect fit with desalination plants whose salty emissions, somewhat ironically for the protesters, now seem to be doing localized good for the oceans. Given it's highly likely pure fresh water will become, if it is not already, one of the world's most precious commodities, we better quickly get good at making it!

There is some irony when the coal industry claim nuclear pollutes the globe with a few kilograms of waste, but deny that billions or trillions of tonnes of greenhouse emissions have a discernible effect. Of course we now suspect that in micro-doses those old world coal fired power stations issue more radiation in total than many of the major events of the past, allegedly even far exceeding atmospheric nuclear testing.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #171 –
I have a question, which may have been answered in previous posts - leaving aside cost, dubious manufacturing practices etc., and just thinking solely about energy requirements, if we built a ridiculously huge bank of solar panels in the outback (half the size of Victoria, for example), would that reliably provide our country's full energy needs ?

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #172 –
Quote from: flyboy77 – on
Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.

Totally stupid to bankrupt the country on new technologies that simply DO NOT work.

We should have had nuclear 40 years ago.  Why in the hell should we impoverish ourselves when we are so rich in resources and then end up paying more for power than any other country.  Because we are dead dumb.  No other country would tolerate it.  1.3 % of the world's emissions.  BFD !!!



Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #173 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I have a question, which may have been answered in previous posts - leaving aside cost, dubious manufacturing practices etc., and just thinking solely about energy requirements, if we built a ridiculously huge bank of solar panels in the outback (half the size of Victoria, for example), would that reliably provide our country's full energy needs ?
Need battery storage, typically Lithium Iron variety, highly expensive to begin with and batteries dont last.
One of the States in the USA is trying a mass solar storage experiment(forget which one), maybe Elon Musk and his fanboys can come up with some new technology. He is spending money on battery technology and wants to go to parts unknown with his SpaceX program so will need some inventive power systems.
Wind farms dont work and are not green either given the cost/resources to build, total waste of money and generate nothing.
Both Solar and Wind also have trouble integrating into the grid due to regulation creating quality issues with frequency.

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #174 –
Quote from: capcom – on
Totally stupid to bankrupt the country on new technologies that simply DO NOT work.

We should have had nuclear 40 years ago.  Why in the hell should we impoverish ourselves when we are so rich in resources and then end up paying more for power than any other country.  Because we are dead dumb.  No other country would tolerate it.  1.3 % of the world's emissions.  BFD !!!
Yes, the whole per capita vs total emissions debate bends to political will and is primarily bogus. Per capita doesn't mean much if you are a postage stamp economy with a with low density population like Australia, so it's really just used by extremists to name and shame.

The real unequivocal issue is total emissions. Everybody knows the major polluters in this regard, having a massive under-resourced low economic status population gets all your per capita emissions average down across the board.

But those realities cannot be used as an excuse for a lack of action by any country.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #175 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Need battery storage, typically Lithium Iron variety, highly expensive to begin with and batteries dont last.
One of the States in the USA is trying a mass solar storage experiment(forget which one), maybe Elon Musk and his fanboys can come up with some new technology. He is spending money on battery technology and wants to go to parts unknown with his SpaceX program so will need some inventive power systems.
Wind farms dont work and are not green either given the cost/resources to build, total waste of money and generate nothing.
Both Solar and Wind also have trouble integrating into the grid due to regulation creating quality issues with frequency.
All good points.

The other major issue with large centralized systems is energy transmission, at the moment moving power around the grid is very inefficient and there are no real world viable solutions to this problem at the moment. I read somewhere that using current technologies if we had to transmit power from Perth to Sydney we might lose as much as 40% in heat due to the resistance of the transmission lines and losses at joins. Some countries including Australia are experimenting with Ultra High Voltage(UHV) or Energy(UHE) transmission lines, but it looks to be both very expensive and very unreliable.

With current transmission systems the more energy you have to move the more inefficient they become.

With UHV it's the reverse, the higher the voltage you use the more efficient it becomes. Just don't go anywhere near the transmission lines as the current systems fails with lightning like results! :o

This is a real problem, because all major economies are invested in long term in fusion energy research, and fusion is a process that improves in efficiency with increasing size. So you need a large centralised system to be very efficient at generating fusion energy, but then you have to distribute it a long way to make use of the massive facility!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #176 –
Thanks LP and EB.

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #178 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/captain-sunshine-says-australia-is-not-living-up-to-its-solar-potential-20180426-p4zbr0.html
This is partly true, in that micro-grids are a potential solution, but it's unlikely they are any cleaner and greener than bulk energy generation. Also as EB1 points out, the longevity of such systems is questionable with some now finding they didn't last the warranty period and the supplier / manufacturer is long gone!

Abramowitz partly ignores the transmission issue, he fails to mention it when discussing the Northern Territory.

In relation to large scale solar there are also questions to be answered as huge solar farms also have localised and global environmental effects. Something that is now being discovered and studied on the Victorian border around Kerang, Echuca and Swan Hill.

The rule seems to be as always, there is no free lunch!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Deer in the Headlights

Reply #179 –


Quote from: LP – on
Yes, the whole per capita vs total emissions debate bends to political will and is primarily bogus. Per capita doesn't mean much if you are a postage stamp economy with a with low density population like Australia, so it's really just used by extremists to name and shame.

The real unequivocal issue is total emissions. Everybody knows the major polluters in this regard, having a massive under-resourced low economic status population gets all your per capita emissions average down across the board.

But those realities cannot be used as an excuse for a lack of action by any country.

Hear you LP.  To push home that point, if we shut down down ALL power tomorrow for an entire year, China would obliterate the savings in a week.  They are the REAL culprits as they're treated as a developing country that is treated far more favourably than one that is obviously developed

We're not anybody's whipping boy