turboplanner

When people start to ask for a thread to be closed, you know they are beaten. For those who want to stop and go away to talk about Aviation, is there a hand on your shoulder stopping you? In amongst the posts which are less than informative is some world shaking information. I've been studying ancient civilizations and it's interesting that some stories in the Bible can not only be corroborated by hard evidence, but can be pinned down to a year, months and tume of day. This is due to the massive amount of evidence being produced and stored thanks to the digital age. On the other hand, many bible stories have been translated through several languages and are currently nonsensical due to the chinese whispers effect. If you are prepared to read, some very interesting information is falling out, some pro-religion, some against.

Read The Hiram Key; if the authors' research progresses it will turn the Roman Catholic Church upside down.

Clearly there's no real interest in the technical aspects of this thread.

If you take the socialist view, then you are quite right. And the reason you are quite right is that our leader and opposition leader of the day are far too busy with the urgent day to day business of tens of portfolios, not the least of which is Finance. If I had my wish the solution would be solar power, but clearly that needs a few technology leaps.

CORRECTION It's clear from this thread that Australia hasn't yet perfected solar power to the point that it can compete with coal fired power stations. With the possible exception of some hydro-electric power stations I'm not aware of Australia having any other working and viable sources to coal on a scale to power Cities. How's that

Sorry if you can't quite visualise it.

Don't come to Melbourne then, we have a new offence of "Dooring". You, parallel park, and open your door to get out when a cyclist riding full blast in your blind spot hits you, and you are automatically at fault. Two or three abreast, driving through stop lights, pulling in front of cars, is common but the bike lobby has managed to avoid registration and number plates, so can't even be booked for not wearing a helmet. We have hundreds of kilometres of new bike tracks with no one using them. The bike lobby got ahead of the apathetics.

It's clear from the content of this thread that its title is incorrect; Australia hasn't perfected solar power and can't produce an economically viable alternative source to coal. QED

It infers it's a fake FT.......not the best example to give.

A 17% fluctuation is well within what the Climate Scientists of the day from CSIRO and the Intergovernmental Panel members of the day were saying around 2001. In fact a 50% error factor would not be out of the question. They were predicting sea level rises of between 2 mm and 50 mm. Then the sensationalists squeezed them out and we saw sea level predictions as high as 2 metres. Greg Hunt has been around all that time, and I think he put a fair case on the twin issues of improving humanity at the same time as preserving the environment and some temperature sensitive species.

Self portrait FT?

Just got my Carbon Tax Repeal Credit - $5.59!

Andy is correct; the professionals who focus on climate change are Climate Scientists rather than comedians. We are heading into an ice age, but that could be tens of thousands of years ago, as you were told on this forum previously The temperature did NOT stop rising 18 years ago - BS is cheap Here is the latest 2014 statement from an authorative source: http://www.csiro.au/~/media/CSIROau/Outcomes/Climate/Understanding/SOC14/State%20of%20the%20Climate%202014.pdf

I'm a bit confused FT. Are these animals adding to coal reserves or generating solar power?

Exactly, there have been a number of Labor governments in since then, so let's leave Howard out of it. The bottom line to the thread title is that Solar power has not been developed to a viable level yet.

If you want to politicise it, I think you'll find the time to set policy was back around the Whitlam era.

The banks are changing over for virtually total demand for electronic transactions, and a preference for private conversations when borrowing money etc. These days virtually all get their cash at the supermarket or ATM. Paying in a cheque to the bank is as easy as feeding your card in, feeding the cheque in and typing a few details (no envelopes any more).

Turbocad (no relation) is very similar to Autocad, interchanges with .dwg files, and also take a lot of learning, but way less expensive.

OK, you come up with something positive then.

You keep focusing on anything slightly technical I say; so delete even the thought of my mention of black smoke because it was the generic of the day used by the EPA before they got smart about specific gases. So let's forget about any engineering terms or mention of anything that might allow some exciting comparisons and place ourselves at the end of the 1980's, when we said to the Government: "This is the very best our industry can do" What the Government said to us was in general terms "We don't give a shit - from January 1 you are going to achieve a target of "x", and just to help you focus, by January 1 in two years time you are going to drop that to "y", and so on year by year up to the present time. And they backed those statements by legislation. When we said "We'd go broke if we had to do that" the response was more or less "tell someone who cares" So we spent the billions and did it, albeit seeing the end of Caterpillar truck engines, and things like the Holden Colorado having a Fiat engine and the Nissan Navara V6 being a Renault engine, but we did it. So if the Government applied the same method of laying down performance standards for power generation, then your technical claims about steam turbine power would be just greeted by "Tell someone who cares, find a way to meet the target". And someone somewhere in the world will find a way to do it and make a lot of money.

I wasn't waffling, I'm on record as saying that diesel engines producing full power had to blow black smoke, more or less the equivalent of what you've just said. The Federal Government introduced performance standards, and we found a way to meet them; that's fact not waffle.

Does anybody want to talk about "How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal?"

The Federal Government, in spite of our loud claims that we couldn't do any better just went ahead and legislated for progressively lower emission performance year after year, and have successfully achieved reductions in the emissions they specified of around 97% from 1992 to the present. I should have said Power Suppliers, not Stations. The Federal Government can introduce performance standards for Power Suppliers, with progressively lower targets each year. So let's say one target is CO2 emission. Because this is performance legislation, the Power Supply company could opt to find a way to produce the same amount of power at a lower fuel burn rate, it could go nuclear, it could go solar, it could invent a new process, but if it wanted to continue to stay in business, it would have to lower its output of the target material, such as CO2. We didn't legislate to use our cars less (although the bike and public transport groups have continually tried to achieve that), and we shouldn't have to reduce our use of appliances. In case someone gets agitated, that doesn't mean we can't have schemes to make the appliances use less electricity.

Yes I was up with all that; we used to have two meters a peak one and an off peak one, but now it's one Smart Meter. The advertising says the smart meter allows you to minimise your power bill by doing your washing, hws etc off peak. HOWEVER, what I posted about was that the Smart meter isn't smart unless you make it smart by having an off peak connector, and if you do that they increase the base rate. So you do get some savings during off peak, but you now pay a higher rate for the bulk of your power usage, so you pay more than you were paying for having everything on the base rate. And of course you will be using your air conditioning most during the day rate, so in summer total costs will skyrocket. So, a nice little gouge.

Correct theory - we burn a LOT less fuel