Leaderboard

I always like (need) to have positive things to look forward to. Next week, Mrs Octave and I are headed off to NZ. This is nothing new, every year we do some kind of tour through and end up staying with our son, or we go on a road trip with our son. We are planning to do this later in the year or early next year; however, we have justified to ourselves an extra trip. My son and partner are having a new house built for them. They are painting the place themselves, and the builder has a quite detailed build schedule that they are adhering to strictly. My son and partner have 2 weeks to fully paint the interior, so we have (generously) offered to go over and help paint. We are really looking forward to inspecting the house because it is a little more high-tech than anything we have built or lived in. This house is a SIP build (structural insulated panel). The insulation rating is amazingly good. Another feature is that the house is amazingly airtight. The average Australian home is rated at 15.4; my son's house is 0.38. My initial question was, "Would not this mean that the air quickly became stale?" There is actually a ventilation system called an HRV (heat recovery ventilator), sometimes referred to as an ERV (energy recovery ventilator) Air is constantly pumped in. The air pumped out goes through a heat exchanger and scavenges the heat in the air going out. This place is so thermally efficient that they did calculations for the heat produced by their 2 desktop PCs (a plus in winter and a negative in summer). This house is being built on a jointly owned block that my son owns with is business partner and wife. They have lived in a huge house that is actually 2 houses in one for many years. The business partner couple already have a large house on this block. They are going to tie together their solar batteries and solar panels, which will equal an enormous 45Kw system. From this, they are planning to be at least partially energy independent. Charging 3 EVs has been factored in. Here is the site. The big house in the background has a bottom floor full of workshops for their joint projects. The engineering gear they have is mind- blowing. My son's partner Amazing double-glazed window facing the winter sun ( expensive, I imagine) Ventilation heat exchanger bits and pieces. This was the day they pressure-tested the house.

I loved Penelope Keith.

This is the age of modernist glaring white cabinets and tiles for every modern home. Imagine my surprise to stay at a recently renovated caravan park that is furnished in rustic federation shearer's quarters decor! Our mate OME has started a trend!

Great development if it works.

Can't work my wife out. First she says "Sure! Get yourself a tattoo." Now she's whining about the bagpipers in the garden.

I was on my way to work this morning and thought stuff it, I'm getting a coffee and going to have it at the beach before I start. My daughter told me on the phone it was -4c in tamworth, and here I get to wake up to 9c and this view. It was 14c by the time I got to the beach. I'm starting to catch on life is too short to let this stuff pass us by and work is not everything.

We have a fat white goldfish with a red cap which we've named Trump. Bit insulting to the fish, but they share the same hairstyle, IQ, and belly to height ratio. Also, they both open their mouth constantly but nothing intelligible comes out.

I particularly liked her role in 'To the Manor born". She and Peter Bowles were absolutely hilarious together.

Why are we surprised? Trump admires dictators and despots. He has stripped the top level of administration of anyone with knowledge and brains, and replaced them with yes-men. The only required attribute is loyalty (and tribute). He has openly said that the American public won't have to vote again, and is actively dismantling democracy. He has used his position to gain him and his equally disgusting family billions - the most corrupt public figure, let alone president, ever. He supports and enables the worst white supremacists in the country, allows and encourages political violence when it's against his adversaries, and is racist himself. And we're surprised when something like this happens?

It's a bit cool here in Nyngan. We are camped by the river, enjoying a glass of red whilst dinner simmers on our little fire pot. Life's good.

So when my son and partner picked us up from the airport they were planning to go to their sea shanty at the pub club. They asked if we would like to come? We had a brilliant time drinking beer and singing shanties. Many obscure shanties. They also make up the verses for the crowd to join in at the chorus. They have written shanties about public transport and current political issues. The crowd varies in age from 10 to very old. Most people seem to be in their 20s or 30s They sang this shanty bellow in honour token Australian. We had an absolute ball and intend to find a club like this near us.

Just pointing out something many may not have known.

Have been visiting the extended family. Well at least those around SEQ. Really enjoying catching up with all. Especially the younger ones. Last night we booked in to a Gold Coast hotel for a rest. In spite of my general dislike for this part of the world, it is nice to wake up to the sound of surf on a beach.

Nah, he just edited out all his keyboard errors.

Did you know.... If you spell Absolutely Nothing backwards, you get.... "Gnighton Yletulosba", which means....... Absolutely Nothing!

My wife once told me, "Sex is more fun on holidays". It wasn't the best postcard I've ever received

This is why I don't do politics or science by meme, or in this case a simple graph, because we are find a set of numbers that suits our agenda and just publish it. Is the above the cost of generation, the wholesale price, or the retail price. Because, the latter two have factors that can distort the market. For example, Denmark's wholesale price is connected to the European markets believe it or not, so if an expensive dirty coal plant happens to produce and sell energy at the same time or within a price setting period, the wholesale price is largely set to be based on that price... which is far more expensive than wind or solar. That is wholesale price distortion. Of course, other European markets are subject to this as well, but since the grid is segmented, not all are setting the same wholesale price. Then the distortions at the retail price are local market conditions, taxes (of which Denmark has a lot - even VAT (GST) on electricity! Wowsers. Not even the UK levies VAT on electricity. So the retail price may not be at all reflective of the generation price. I prefer the Levilised Cost of Electricity comparison, which seeks to take out some of the more artificial price setting. According to Google AI, Denmark wins on wind, but loses on Gas and Solar: Note, the cheapness of fracked shale gas does not include the cost of cleaning up. Also, if Denmark decided to stay gas (or presumably coal, etc), from the above, they would be paying roughly double or more to produce electricity. I would suggest that the numbers show that wind and solar is much cheaper - for them. Not so much for the USA, again except this does not cover the true clean up costs. Which sort of shows the point of renewables - the optimum mix will be determined by local conditions. And, yeah, in some cases, even fossil fuel generation will make sense.. So, lets do a like for like comparison. South Australia, according to Google has around 84% of its electricity generated from wind (44% of total electricity generated) versus solar (33%). According to your chart, Denmark has a touch under 70%. That would suggest for South Australia, solar and onshore are very cost effective producers of electricity and offshore not so much (at least not yet). Also, because of SA's rapid deployment of storage, they seem to be already reaping some economies of scale benefits because of a rapid roll out, but as there is only commentary, it is hard to tell. In addition, in SA, gas is more than double solar and coal is almost triple the cost of solar, and around double of offshore wind. It does though, beat offshore wind, so unless we can address the issues that cause that, offshore wind (which probably has more constant wind). But interesting, SA is more wind and solar as a percentage of its generation, yet on a levelised basis, SA is cheaper. And as someone who has worked in the generation business, I am sure you're aware of the importance of this measure over retail or wholesale prices as a true indication of the comparative cost of generation. Thee price that is paid at the "pump" is only in a small way related to the cost of generation.. that, in @pmccarthy's vernacular, is the politics end of the argument. The cost of generation is the data end, and renewables are already at a big advantage there. Take politics out of it, and there really is no compelling reason to do so., The sun doesn't always shine - no.. Only at night or seriously overcast days is it that bad, but when it is shining brightly, we can store the excess and save it for when it isn't shining brightly. Even today, they are developing nocturnal solar panels which can harvest the infrared rays during radiating cooling of the earth to generate electricity (https://www.moeveglobal.com/en/planet-energy/sustainable-innovation/nocturnal-solar-panels-energy-without-sunlight). And there is a new technology that it looking at capturing vibrations from the wind and earth instead of using blades to generate electricity - fewer parts, cheaper and less landfill: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibration-powered_generator This is the point. Fossil fuel burning is destroying the planet (in conjunction with a lot of other stuff we do). And now, it is no longer cheap to do it; and it will get more expensive. So we have to seek out alternatives. To not do it is kicking the can down the road and just making it more expensive to fix. It can be done; the tech is already here and it is improving very quickly. It is the politics that is the issue. In the mean time, if you want to take a meme-led approach, go for it. As for wind and solar not yet powering most of a country - well - no.. but it does most of a state that is the physical (admittedly not population) size bigger than many countries. But it's a ridiculous assertion because a place should use the most appropriate renewable/s, not an arbitrary renewable, anyway.

Coincidence perhaps, the importers of modern day Urals, Ural Australia, are located at Uralla, NSW.

I just picked up my car from a service. The dealer gives me a little bag of jelly lollies. I don't know whether this is common practice, I'm afraid to try another dealer in case I don't get the jelly lollies.

My point was it is immaterial if it were nuclear or fossil; France's generation planning has been better than the UK and Germany's.. The fact that France exports energy is not in itself an advertisement for nuclear. I get it is a predictable load "comapred to renewables", or intermittents as you call them. Yes, their source is intermittent, but, again, you ignore that the actual generation bit is only part of the puzzle of supply.. there is this thing called storage you are leaving out of the equation. Solar and wind are not the only net zero generation technologies. If we are talking non nuclear, zero emissions, there are a few already around the world. But you don't need me to tell you.. But here are a few: Iceland, Paraguay, Albania, Ethiopia. Greater than 90% includes Netherlands, Cost Rica, Congo, and a few others. Google can help list them all. The UK today, from offshore wind farms alone; so that does not include onshore wind farms, and solar farms, with the right investment, can power its country for free (well, amortisation, maintenance, and depreciation costs alone). That includes industrial use. Yes, the up front cost and initial amortisation and depreciation costs are high, but in the mid - longer term, the costs reduce dramatically.. the costs only increase in fossil and nuclear fuel... and with nuclear, you still have to factor the real cost of decommissioning and handling waste... And mining uranium, transporting it, etc.. And you still have the depreciation, amortisation, and maintenance costs.. and the latter ain't cheap. It takes investment - as does nuclear and indeed new fossil plants; it takes time to build and deploy... Your argument is today we don't have the capacity for renewables.. That is correct. There is no arguing that. That does not mean we stop. We still have horses running around and wood to make carriages from; but cars became a more efficient technology. They weren't for a long time.. but investment continued as people could see they would become more efficient. Renewables are now coming up the same maturity curve. As I say, follow the money.. most banks are not interested in lending to new fossil developments because they look at the two elements that can cost them money - credit risk and market risk. And the models are telling them to stay well away from old technology.

I guess I am a serial offender. Just published a second book on gold mining history. https://www.echobooks.com.au/books/gold-beneath-the-hill

I have just been catching up on here. There is still some disbelief in the science.. And there is the argument for nuclear, which hasn't really changed for a while. @pmccarthy - from October, I believe you will, like it or not, be the beneficiary of the economics of renewables. As I understand, all of Victoria will be able to receive free electricity between the hours of 11am - 2pm every day if they have a smart meter or opt in through their energy retailer. Of course, you don't have to, but it is there.. because of solar - a renewable. Not because of fossil fuels, etc. For working couples/families/households, this is not going to give much - the fridge I guess plus any alarms and compute they may have on.. But, if one has an electric car and takes the train or other means to work, set it to charge in this time.. better still with a fast charger.. Suddenly you are now getting a chink of your vehicle fuel for free, too. Can't do that with fossils... You can thank renewables for that.. @Siso - I get that France, with a well developed pwoer generation network exports a lot of electricity especially to the UK and Germany. This is not because of nuclear. They would be doing this if they had all fossil plants, too. This is because the governments of the UK and Germany (Merkel, in this case) are crap at energy planning. Pre Fukishima, Germany was producing enough of its own power without needing top ups from France.. one of two blunders of Merkel's reign, and in this case, as she is a physicist by training is harder to fathom, she knee-jerked the closure of the county's nuclear generation plants without allowing a transition to other generation. Germany is playing catch up. There was talk of recommissioning one of the plants, but the decom process had progressed sufficiently to make it uneconomic. I am not completely across of Germany's capacity increasing plans, but the irony of this is that they are importing electricity generated by the same means that they shut it down, and some of it on their own front door. I honestly believe Merkel was losing her marbles towards the end of her reign. At first, I agreed with the development of new nuclear in the UK - we already have a nuclear industry - of which I was part of and still have the occasional dip of my toes in it; and renewables in the form of efficient electricity generation is not really viable, right? Well, as it turns out, that is... wrong. A couple of days ago, I was in a discussion at work, where, amongst other things, we provide project finance for electricity generation.. and one of the originators said the UK today has the generation capacity to power the country from its offshore wind farms alone. I scoffed at it (I don;t know why; part of an originators' job is to know the industry they are trying to sell finance to inside out). I did my research and yes - offshore wind farms alone have enough capacity to power the country, at least mathematically, but would need investment in infrastructure (storage, cabling, and grid connectivity). Accoirding to Gemini AI, this would be about 30% more than the cost of nuclear - but nuclear already has infra in place... However, a full lifecycle cost of nuclear v renewables, by Gemini has renewables has renewables between a little over 1/3 and 2/3 of the cost of nuclear. Of course, there has to be a transition; you can't day 1 replace on a like for like basis, so the cost comparison has to be refined. But suddenly, nuclear as a long term strategy is not looking as compelling as it did.

I think there is.. The science is more or less settled and contrary opinion, which is healthy, doesn't really hold water. Even the economics points wildly in favour of renewables. Yes, there is an initial cost, as there was with setting up fossil fuel generation. But if you stop investing, you eventually stop growing and wither and die in the competition of emerging forces. Even China can see this. What is stopping progress is... politics.. or vested interests with money and ideology.. not the science. Therefore, it is the bit that does need comment.

I watched a documentary about the Webb telescope last Night . It enables us to look way back in time, All that Info was made available to the entire world. One of the Most important Scientific achievements EVER. Nev

Yes I was aware of this. My son has a computer games development company. Their flagship games is based on an idea my son had when he was 10. His company now based in NZ employs around 7 people. We are now the poor relatives https://share.google/7DKAr1mzPdrUUSidR

If you are planning to install a battery to store your solar or a complete solar panels/battery system, consider becoming a VPP (virtual power plant). I did & got an additional subsidy on my 18.4 kWh battery of $676.00. I joined Amber as the VPP Manager at a cost of $25.00 a month. Instead of getting just a few cents/kWh when the sun is shining & the rates are low, the system charges the battery till its full & sells the energy when the price is high. My average is 18.2c/kWh. All my costs are at wholesale rates so I pay the same to buy power as the Energy retailers. In Summer when there is too much solar in the grid the sale price goes negative. When that happens & my battery is full, the system curtails the solar production so none is exported. When there is a grid failure somewhere like a power station partial shutdown the spot price can go to $10.00/kWh or even more. When that happens the system will export energy at its maximum rate. In an hour I can be credited more than a couple of months electricity cost while helping to stabilise the grid.

No point posting them here then, Nev.

All things considered, I find gravity somewhat attractive.. It creates an atmosphere all of it's own. Nev

The Republicans wish he'd stop going on about the 2020 election because it's not helping their chances, but at the same time he's doing everything he can to rig the November election beforehand and scheming to disrupt the results if the Democrats look like winning. He's trying every trick in the book to assert his control over the States' ability to run their elections, but fortunately a large number of State governors, both Democrat and Republican are determined to keep him out of it and ensure their elections are run fairly. It's amazing how in Trump's world, elections are only free and fair when he and the Republicans win but rigged beyond recovery when they lose.

That's my excuse too. I'm really much younger than I look.

Well, a week has passed since I arrived on these fair shores.. I decided to travel up to Tocumwal today to look at some land that may feature in my retirement. But, a nice surprise - I reconnected with my ab initio flight instructor of over 30 years ago! It was fantastic to meet up We flapped the gums chatted about old times and of course our different journeys; and I happen to be in town of the evening of the local aero club meet. So, will do the three S's and trundle off shortly to meet the local aviation fraternity, Doesn't get much better than that!

We messaged our son in NZ to remind him of our flight details. My wife referred to us as FIFO workers. My son's message back was "f***ing Australians, coming here and taking all the jobs"😆

In similar news, because I was born with brown eyes I've never had a period.

From the Guardian...

My Dad had one also, it was his first rangefinder camera after trying to use an old clapped out bakelite camera that someone must have given him. He took lots of family photos with the Neoca during the 1950s. In his latter years he gave me all the negatives which I still have, stored safely. He developed them himself and they look pretty good. Unfortunately Dad's Neoca was stolen, so, for nostalgia, I bought one as part of my collection, and also as a bit of family memorabilia.

As I was creeping into bed, she asked, "You are drunk again, aren't you!". "What makes you think that?", I asked defensively. "You live nest door."

Just catching up on this thread. Apart from some misstated knowledge of the First Nations' which I will deal with later, there are three main threads of negative impact immigration. The first is the impact on the housing market and how it pushes up prices. The recent developments of tax changes have already seemed to knock that one on the head, but it is too early to determine if that is the case, and I will explain why in a second. But, as a rough and ready set of numbers, I got Google to give me the following in a table: So, what does it compare (all sourced from ABS data): Each year from 2000 to 2025 EOFY. The net migration into Australia The natural increase in the population (non-immigrants) Net dwelling additions to Australia - that means number of new dwellings built minus the number of those demolished. The average number of people per immigrant household The average number of people per non-immigrant household The new immigrant homes needed based on the number of immigrants divided by the average household size The new homes needed for non immigrant families The surplus or deficit of new dwellings built minus the sum of immigrant and non-immigrant houses required. This is rough and ready by any measure. For example, we don't take into account the number of bedrooms per new dwelling. But on this measure, only 6 of the 26 years there was a deficity in the number of new dwellings constructed versus the estimated new homes required across both the immigrant and non immgrant dwellings required. The biggest deficit was 77k homes in 2022-23, immediately after Covid. Pre-Covid, the biggest deficit was 7.5K. The biggest surplus was 142,500 dwellings in a year! With the exception of 2024-25, which ad a small surplus of 2,700 most years of surplus were well into the 10s of thousands. This is especially important because of the compounding effect. Every year, immigrants come, and then the next year some/many will have a baby or 2. That baby further increases the population. That is reflected in the domestic and not immigrant size and skews the figures at is is deemed one domestic person in the household of domestic population.. and increases the number of dwellings required according to the stats. These are two examples of statistical error, but the numbers of surpluses involved for the amount of years would indicate that the issue of immigration on housing in de minimis; or marginal at best. There goes that claim that immigration has a big impact on the housing costs. The second, on crime, it is hard to get stats. The reason why is because an immigrant is considered someone who is born overseas, and with young kids committing crimes, many may well be born in Australia and considered part of the domestic population. In addition, the ABS does not publish statistics by ethnic origin. So the best I could come up with is this from AI: It's not much, but it points to a debunking of the myths. My anecdotal observations in the UK is that crime, with the exception of hate crime, is linked more to socio-economic issues than specific ethinic backgrounds. But like Australia, the UK statistics Office doesn't publish such information, at least according to Google. The third is the dilution of Aussie culture ("traditional Australian"). This is a little too subjective for me; the behaviour of Aussies differs on socio-economic and location. Just look at Melbourne Football club members, for example. And if you think Aussies are laid back, well, they weren't compared to their UK cousins, at least pre Covid, that is for sure. But, that was my impression. And, they certainly don't or didn't swear anywhere near that of the Brit, nor did they drink anywhere near as much, either (NT excepted, I guess).. Again, that was my observation, which may be different to yours. But I get the feeling Aussies have this view of themselves as somehow unique.. My travels have busted that myth to me. However, I do get that people who have a vastly different culture and physical appearance can come across as not integrating with the local culture. There is a difference between people coming here and doing well, and people coming here, doing well, and integrating. But that does not mean they have to not wear what they want (Australia is about freedom of choice, right). Nor does it mean they need to fit into everything a "traditional Aussie" would do.. Many years ago, if you didn't smoke, you weren't Australian.. Despite the tobacco wars, there has been a big shift in attitudes to smoking, drinking, and I think those with massive muscly cars are considered either bogans or correcting for other deficiencies. I doubt much of this is the result of immigration., yet our cultural values have changed. Even marital rape is now illegal all over Australia since 1996 (though it was progressively made illegal from 1976). Think about it.. Marital rape was acceptable in modern Australia. Sometimes, it is good to have a cultural change.

Ah... The smoke must have escaped the system. Just go to the dark side and buy a BMW. Here is my little beast K1200R 21 years old and 121,000 km and feels like new.

That is a bold claim to make without evidence. The short answer is no. There is no credible estimate that connecting Snowy Hydro 2.0 to consumers requires $1 trillion in grid upgrades. Here's where the claim appears to come from. What Snowy Hydro 2.0 actually costs The project has experienced enormous cost overruns: Original estimate (2017): $2 billion Revised estimate (2023): $12 billion Snowy Hydro now acknowledges the final cost will be higher than $12 billion. Some independent analysts (Bruce Mountain and Ted Woodley) estimate the total economic cost could reach around $42 billion, but this includes: construction, financing (interest), and Snowy 2.0's share of major transmission projects such as HumeLink and VNI West. Even critics of the project are talking about tens of billions, not hundreds of billions. Where does the "$1 trillion" come from? There are a couple of possibilities. 1. Confusing Snowy 2.0 with the entire energy transition Some opinion pieces have argued that Australia's entire electricity transition—generation, transmission, storage, distribution upgrades and financing over decades—could approach very large figures. For example, one recent opinion article claimed: about $450 billion for transition infrastructure plus around $600 billion in financing costs and rounded this to roughly $1 trillion. It was not referring solely to connecting Snowy Hydro 2.0 to consumers. That estimate is controversial and is not an official government, AEMO or CSIRO estimate. 2. Simple exaggeration Sometimes numbers grow in online debates. Someone may have taken: "$42 billion for Snowy" plus "Australia's grid will need hundreds of billions of investment" and turned it into "Snowy needs a trillion dollars of transmission." There is no evidence for that statement. What do official bodies estimate for transmission? Australia does need significant transmission investment regardless of Snowy 2.0. AEMO's Integrated System Plan includes projects like: HumeLink VNI West Marinus Link EnergyConnect These collectively amount to tens of billions of dollars, not hundreds of billions for Snowy alone. The purpose is to connect new renewable generation across the National Electricity Market, not just Snowy Hydro. Is Snowy 2.0 competitive? That's a separate question. There are legitimate criticisms: huge cost blowouts years behind schedule uncertainty over final cost batteries have become much cheaper since Snowy 2.0 was conceived Many energy economists now question whether Snowy 2.0 would be approved if starting from scratch today. Others argue its enormous storage capacity and expected operating life (many decades) still make it valuable for grid reliability. The "$1 trillion to connect Snowy 2.0" claim isn't supported by any credible estimate. Even critics of the project put Snowy 2.0's total cost at around $40–42 billion, including construction, financing and associated transmission. The "$1 trillion" figure comes from some opinion pieces estimating the possible cost of Australia's entire long-term energy transition—not the cost of connecting Snowy Hydro 2.0 to consumers. They're two completely different claims. So I'd rate the original statement as: "Connecting Snowy Hydro 2.0 costs $1 trillion" → False "Snowy Hydro 2.0 has become extremely expensive" → True "Australia will need major transmission investment during the energy transition" → True "Those transmission costs are all because of Snowy Hydro 2.0" → False

Let me see if I have got this straight.. your position is that fossils/nuclear provide energy security over renewables (and its related tech)? If that is so, then the above post sort of throws that out the window faster than a Putin dissident. Scotland are paying power stations to mot produce power because of a failure to plan execution of upgrading to renewables. They asked to have all this extra capacity in the form of renewables added to the grid that cannot handle it. That is a policy or politics failure. Not a renewables can't meet "baseload" failure. It is akin to building a new suburb with only bicycle lanes but to be extra green, adding driveways with electric car chargers and declaring it an ice car free green suburb - and they crying EV cars aren't practical transport for a suburban life. That is called overpaying or underinvesting in energy security... the payments they make to compensate the owners for the governments cock up probably would have gone a decent way to grid upgrades. On the other hand, Raring power station was availing itself of a government guarantee because, even presumably fully amortised, wasn't predicted to be economically viable (ie produce power at a price that others could and make money).. in the supposed economically most effective way being a privatised market. Isn't that the government being tapped by the fossil fuel industry for energy security? BTW, Origin don't currently opt into the scheme as they are predicting, again fully amortised, it will not lose money We can find individual cases with all forms of generation that have not gone to plan or need a bail out. And all forms receive some form of government subsidy. That is policy because of energy security

Heart attacks and cancer take out 1.2M Americans every year, they are America's biggest killers. A lot of that can be put down to their rubbishy, ultra-processed food, full of toxic additives. If you pick up a factory processed food and the ingredients label reads like a biblical text, or an extract from a science article, put it back. The food processing additives are nearly all industrial by-products, or based on petroleum-orgin chemicals. The worst part is buying food that says it has no additives. Not in their factory, anyway. Then you find out they are importing food ingredients from other countries, that have had illegal, un-approved or dodgy additives added, in that other country. Orange juice is an example. You buy Australian-packaged orange juice, it says, "no additives, just 100% orange juice". Then you find out they're importing orange juice CONCENTRATE from Brazil, where additives not approved here, have been added to the concentrate. So you're getting un-approved additives in your juice, yet the manufacturers here, tell you you aren't. Our food labelling system is as dodgy as a 3 dollar note. Another interesting angle is seed oils. RFK Junior, despite his crazyiness, does have some relevant points with his crusade against seed oils. Here's an example. Cottonseed oil is the most common frying/cooking oil used. It's used in every commercial kitchen, cafe and restuarant. Why? Because it's cheap, and no food business will pay a lot more, for better quality oils. The rub with cottonseed oil is - cotton is not recognised as a food crop. Food crops have all sorts of laws banning certain pesticides and weedicides from being used on them. Not so with cotton. Cotton is attacked by hordes of bugs, they love the stuff. So the cotton growers use millions of litres of highly toxic pesticides, and weedicides to assist in cotton growth - and half of them are not allowed in food production. But the cotton seeds are then processed to yield lots of cheap oil, which is then sold as cooking and frying oil. It is idiocy. I read an article the other day, where a cooking guru was lamenting the cooking show chefs, and their lack of attention to good, healthy cooking oils. The writer talked about how the celebrity chefs went to great pains to select premium foods and indulge in celebrated food preparation processes - then they reached for cheap, shitty cottonseed oil, to cook it all in!!

Actress and presenter Dame Penelope Keith has passed away. Notes online simply say died c. June 2026.

Even the OIL companies KNOW it's happening.. Plenty of deniers do so because it's in the Financial interests BHP lost a lot of face Recently and were caught out breaking a promise.. Trump and Hanson are Notable deniers but Hanson is a Trump Worshipper (and Farage and Victor Auban) Trump has also Handicapped the EPA. Nev

Did you know that Arnotts Tim Tam biscuits are named after a racehorse? Tim Tam was a champion American Thoroughbred racehorse foaled in 1955 and owned by Calumet Farm. Sired by Hall of Famer Tom Fool out of Two Lea, he was trained by Horace A. Jones and ridden by Bill Hartack. In 1958, Tim Tam won the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness Stakes, becoming a strong favorite for the Triple Crown. However, his bid ended in the Belmont Stakes when he fractured a sesamoid bone during the race, finishing second and ending his racing career. Tim Tam died of a heart attack in 1982 and was buried at Calumet Farm. The Australian chocolate biscuit Tim Tam is named after the horse.

I am not a huge gamer myself although I use flight sim. Once a week I connect with my brother in law who lives interstate and we fly our world trip together. We have flown all the way around Australia and NZ. Over the last few weeks we have island hopped to New Guinea where we will attempt some of those insane remote mountain top strips. We usually plan a one hour hop so it is a project that will last for years. We try to use current weather conditions and correct flight planning procedures. There are many games that are a workout for the brain.

Point of interest from the above newspaper item. In 1718 the remperature was recorded as 38 degrees Reaumur. The Réaumur scale is an obsolete temperature measurement system introduced in 1730 by French naturalist René-Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur. It sets the freezing point of water at 0° Ré and the boiling point at 80° Ré. 1 Re = 1.25C and 1 Re = 2.25 F

English is not actually a static language either. If you don't believe me, try listening to a group of 13yo's talking and see how much you understand...