How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal

[Jabiru Phil]

Geoff, there is a university in the UK working on a "spray on" solar panel. Pretty sure solar panels are mostly silicon which can be recycled fairly easily.

Spoke to an importer in QLD recently. They are agents for solar panels from Italy which look and act as TILES.

 

Can be used on walls, roofs, fences etc.

 

I didn't take a lot of interest at the time but they may have an interesting product here.

 

Phil.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

One thing which gets up my nose is the hundreds of years supply we have of natural gas in Bass Strait-

 

... Lithium Propane gas price for vehicles is pushed up as far as the market will bear - in fact above that since LP Gas...

Good point Turbs (I'm sure you meant "Liquified" Propane Gas). We should reserve a big slice of our gas to sustain and promote our own industry, rather than selling it off cheap. The trouble is that any fossil fuel, even gas, is not renewable and releases loads of greenhouse gasses. While we focus our investment on petrochemicals they will undercut renewables and stymie the development of safer energy sources. Lobbyists from the coal and gas industries have been quite successful in ensuring our economy becomes dependent on exporting coal and gas. For the sake of our children, well-informed scientists are telling us we need to leave most of it in the ground.

 

We need to quickly adapt our economy to Australia's truly limitless resource- solar energy.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I wonder if experts actually sit down and do cost benefit analyses, or whether Cabinet just put it on the agenda and use their own collective wisdom. I keep hearing the Victorian desal plant go the go ahead because one member of cabinet said "But what if it doesn't rain again" which was used to write off further dam capacity.

Perhaps a Desal plant should be tossed into the "strategic defence" category, along with submarines etc; we may never need them, but if we do we'll be grateful for someone's foresight. Meanwhile, local high-tech industry gets a boost.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

It seems crazy to me that not every house in Australia is fitted with rooftop solar arrays. Certainly this should be the case for all new builds...-

Exactly, Soleair. You are on the money.

 

More than a decade ago PV roof tiles were developed by Prof. Green's team at UNSW. Then Sydney had a hailstorm and spent $800 million replacing broken roof tiles with the same old thing. For a similar sort of money we could have had a "generational" leap in efficiency.

 

The world laughed at Brazil when they mandated the use of locally-produce ethanol instead of imported petrol.

 

Why can't this country show the same sort of vision?

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I tend to speed read the emails from my sustainable friends and then quickly delete them, but I recall one study which reported that cell life may be shorter than the pay back point for a lot of systems.

...which shows your selective reading (which we all suffer from). Perhaps you should become a little more open-minded and give those emails the attention they deserve.

 

 

[turboplanner]

...which shows your selective reading (which we all suffer from). Perhaps you should become a little more open-minded and give those emails the attention they deserve.

Not when your friends seem to number the active half of the Greens, and Labor Parties, slightly smaller Liberals, and than the environmental groups who seem to track down every thesis there is. I read as much as I can then oil up the chainsaw, put the winch on the 4WD, pack the guns and I'm off for the bush.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Whenever progressive, scientific evidence based (97% of climate scientists) ideas clash with the selfish interests of 'established players', then rational arguments go out of the window. I asked in a previous post what a primary producer was doing watering livestock with potable drinking water. No answer. Is it still ok to water sheep with drinking water during a drought? Short memories indeed when we forget how perilously close communities came to drying out completely during the '10 year drought'. ACC is well supported by rock solid evidence and, no, I don't feel that I need to state the arguments here - they are available publicly and have been canvassed 'for ever'. My point is that specious arguments such as China is worse or the climate is actually cooling are wheeled out as though they are fact. Renewable energy is clean efficient and as close to non polluting as you can imagine. The fact that a federal Govt is in denial does not mean that King Canute was right. We have everything to lose if we don't go with the rest of the world on this one. BTW my nom-de-plume is meant as a very light-hearted jest. Regards, Don

You've got a nerve demanding answers when you can't provide answers yourself, or make a rational argument.

 

The reason I water stock with potable drinking water is that is what is supplied in my area. Irrigation and stock water further out which for most of the country is still potable is usually supplied for about 1/10 the cost.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Just remember, everyone, the next time your house or office is a bit cold, turn those heaters off and go put on warm sox, or the next time it is a bit hot, make sure you turn off those fans or AC units. 

 

Adjust your fridge/freezer so that you aren't selfishly keeping your food cold, and turn your pool pumps off too so that you don't use too much power.

 

 

 

We all need to do our bit, you know, to stop that naughty coal fired power stations from supplying the power that the community needs.

 

 

 

In the meantime the horse racing industry on the "prime agricultural land" in the Hunter will continue to induce the great unwashed masses to binge-drink & blow their cash gambling on racing while the new landed gentry squattocracy & a couple of Saudis with our best interests at heart continue to control that industry ......... while all flying in on their Gulfstreams.

 

 

 

The old bumper sticker said "Ban Mining. Let the masses freeze in the dark." Well just wait until there are rolling blackouts here in a year or 2 and watch how the average citizen insists on and votes for secure base-load power.

 

 

 

It is secure base-load power that underpins & provides almost all that we have and the only 2 real options are coal or nuclear. Your choice.

Not so, Captain. While I agree totally about good farmland given over to pampered racehorses, your points about base load and nuclear power may be out of date.

 

Nuclear power has only ever been economical when subsidised by a large national nuclear defence effort. (While being an opponent of nuclear energy, I must admit it ain't all bad; without it's by-products, the Voyager space probes would have died decades ago.)

 

Johnny Howard was a scathing critic of many good ideas, including solar power. He claimed renewables would never provide base load electricity. They have done so for decades in Tasmania and recent progress with renewables is very promising- unless it's undercut by subsidised coal.

 

You seem to be with the coal lobby, which readily resorts to scare-mongering about blackouts and huge power bills. The reality is that recent increases are mainly due to over-investments in the network. They did not anticipate the reduction in electricity consumption due to the boom in rooftop PVs.

 

 

[Methusala]

Turboplanner said,"You've got a nerve demanding answers when you can't provide answers yourself, or make a rational argument."

 

This is what I see constantly...when you can't put together a cohesive argument, then insult will do. I know all of the arguments and we have seen them canvassed constantly in the media. My beef is that the oponents of rational discussion will never argue point to point but don't resyle from insulting their opposites. I have been a plumber for 40+ years and I can't believe that anybody thinks that feeding good potable water, treated at great expense by the authorities is only fit to be thrown at animals. And then you complain about what you are charged for the privilege! To get back to the stream behind this discussion the sooner coal is dead and buried the better for all of the earths creatures.

 

 

[skeptic36]

This is what I see constantly...when you can't put together a cohesive argument, then insult will do. I know all of the arguments and we have seen them canvassed constantly in the media. My beef is that the oponents of rational discussion will never argue point to point but don't resyle from insulting their opposites.

So far I don't believe we have seen a cohesive argument from your good self on this subject, and wasn't it you who likened people such as myself to " one punch thugs "?

 

 

[eightyknots]

Australia has a MASSIVE amount of fresh water flowing out to sea from the ranges including those you mentioned. Ion Idriess travelled the Great Divide from Victoria to Queensland and even further into Far North Queensland and came up with a scheme to turn rivers inland. He wrote a book about it called "The Great Boomerang" When he wrote it the earthmoving equipment available had little more capacity than men with shovels, but there would be plenty of opportunities today.

It is a pity that some form of this plan was never implemented, even if it was done in stages to ascertain the effectiveness.

 

I think that, with sufficient environmental mitigation, this concept plan is still viable and is worthy of further investigation ...and hopefully implementation.

 

 

[BenOrsbor]

Geoff, there is a university in the UK working on a "spray on" solar panel. Pretty sure solar panels are mostly silicon which can be recycled fairly easily.

Well I still believe solar technology is the best way to solve your future energy crisis..

 

 

[kgwilson]

Solar generation at a micro level is not a problem as those who have PV arrays on their roofs will attest. The problem is being able to store and use it when the sun goes down. Until battery or capacitor storage costs come down to a level where a genuine payback is able to be gained most of us will be still connected to the grid so we are slaves to the coal industry.

 

I have a 2 kW system on the roof which cost 4k. I get 6c a kWh for the surplus I produce but pay 34c a kWh for what I buy, peak & shoulder & 17c a kWh off peak.

 

We run the dishwasher, washing machine etc during the day & have a heat pump for hot water so much of hot water power is from solar. We have a fridge freezer plus an upright freezer, have aircon in the bedroom & fans elsewhere & a big plasma TV with 2 people in the household.

 

In the past year these are the results

 

Solar power generated 3430 kWh

 

Solar power used 1590 kWh

 

Solar power exported 1840 kWh

 

Grid power purchased 3040 kWh

 

If I had storage capacity I would only need to buy 1200 kWh for the year. If I had a 3kW system on the roof and storage capacity I would be self sufficient.

 

The problem is storage costs are too high so can't be justified at present. The offset would be a saving on the energy imported & the grid connect supply charge of $500.00 a year.

 

Being connected to the grid means that anything larger than the 2kW solar capacity I have is just a waste of money as I can't even use what I produce now & the return on what I export is pathetic. How anyone connected to the grid can justify a 3 or 4 or more kW system beats me. Most don't seem to be able to explain the logic of their decision to put a big system in. The main reason is I suspect the BS supplied by the solar system retailer.

 

When I can justify putting in the appropriate storage capacity to run everything 24/7 I will tell Origin to go and get @#$%*!

 

BTW the current ROI on the system I installed over a perceived 25 year life of the panels & 10 year life of the inverter is around 11% so it is still way above keeping money in the bank.

 

 

[AVOCET]

Or we could all just go back to beating each other up with clubs ,

 

Which will probably happen sooner or later .

 

 

[bexrbetter]

"Just a classic example of aging white men who don't understand the future."

Just thieves, the old guard controlling the "system"coal and oil companies make them rich and no one can stop them. Hanson made inroads and ended up in jail, not interested in the left and right wing arguments surrounding that, I am talking from a pure power gain threat POV, and she was a threat.

 

Solar panels and the other renewables can save mankind from the inevitable disaster that will result from our accelerating use of fossil fuels.

They can certainly help but don't lose sight of those solar panels and renewables are made from and with oil and coal.

 

You know the story, "Privatised (everything ) is cheaper, better managed and good for all of us " CRAP!

I have said it here before, I don't care what you think about China, Commies etc, the fact is that people's ability to exist here comes first; water, gas and power is dirt, dirt cheap for everybody as well as rice and eggs.

 

I was never able to fathom why Oz can't do the same and simply increase taxes on everything else to address the balance and give people the choice what they spend their money on - they are going to spend it anyway, that's a given, and exactly the same amount of tax can be recovered. Privatisation of services has F'd Oz, they are essential services and should never leave the hands of the people.

 

the sad thing is the Chinese end up burning out coal and the ash falls on the fields, which ends up in the food chain within months of it falling. The Chinese gov will end up buying Australian farms to feed their population.

Plenty of land here FT and it ain't polluted - I've had soil tests done for each block we have developed and am about to do more in a few months for the next development, I'll track it if you like and I'll even send the samples to Oz so you can do it. If you like, happy to send a bag of local rice so you can get it tested (Oz rice is much nicer than Chinese rice btw).

 

Of course if you are that concerned about it, stop buying Chinese products, restart manufacturing in Oz then with less manufacturing in China you will have less to be concerned about.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Just did a survey of the equipment at home and at my neighbour's place bought from China.

 

Generator - ran for 20 minutes then engine failure, repaired under warranty, ran for 5 minutes then engine failure - got money back, bought a Japanese Subaru generator for $1900.00

 

Drill Stand - paid about $300.00 can't use it on steel because the feed gears don't mesh correctly and it jumps into the metal - total write off

 

Trolley Jack - lasted for about 10 jacking operations then seals failed, no parts unrepairable - total write off.

 

Trolley Jack - much heavier this time - about four jacking operations, same problem - total write off.

 

Engine Stand - bent sagged and waved within an inch of it's capacity, couldn't trust it to withstand strong spanner use - sold for scrap back to China.

 

Chainsaw - About two hours work then the starter recoil system failed (plastic used where steel required. No parts, no warranty - total write off

 

Chinese Spanners - virtually all failed

 

Ferguson Tractor - 1955 Still working, almost no maintenance required

 

Ferguson Tractor - 1967 Still working, "

 

International B275 Tractor - 1956 Still, working, almost no maintenance

 

Briggs and Stratton Engines - 1960's onward, all working except one with carby gummed up by contaminated fuel

 

British and German steel tools - no maintenance required

 

Sidchrome spanners - all still working

 

So yes there is a message there.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

I hesitate to buy into this thread, because it's not my area of expertise; but I'd offer some comments from my own personal observations - not in any order of priority:

 

China - or at least parts of it - is currently suffering from massive air pollution problems. So was Australia - or at least parts of it - in the 1960s and 1970s. I recall that the pollution in the Latrobe valley was horrendous; and also the Hunter valley, which I often traversed by air in the 1980s, was often so thick one could almost land on the smog. The Sydney basin was almost IFR due to the smog, except when a week of westerly winds exported it to New Zealand. Picking one's way down the northern lane was a matter of navigating between landmarks about five miles apart, and one could not see the next landmark until almost on top of it.

 

The F27 that I ran for CSIRO in the 1980s (see attached) was used, amongst other things, to survey the air in the Latrobe valley, before and after the power stations installed electrostatic precipitators in their stacks, and possibly other anti-pollution devices. It was also used to prove that the acid rain in Scandinavia was due to pollution crossing the North Sea, from Britain (that was done by following a tracer chemical injected into the plume from Mt. Isa out to 600 miles offshore past Broome). China is, I suspect, currently suffering because its Government has not spent the money to do similar research - or studied the results of such research elsewhere. Cheap electricity has a hidden (or maybe not so hidden) cost.

 

In the '70s I used to fly to work at Bankstown in my Auster, from Mittagong. One could follow the ash plume in the air from the concrete plant at the back of Picton, for 30 miles, in winter, and the countryside around the plant was white for miles. Nowadays, there's no trace of that; the plant cleaned up its act.

 

These cleanups have been effected despite increasing reliance on coal. Solar had not come into the picture at all, at that stage.

 

The Sydney basin was badly affected by brown smog from motor vehicle exhausts - and I spent about 40 years of my life sitting in a car for two hours a day, simply to get to & from work. The Govt. approach to that was to mandate catalyctic converters on cars - which made unleaded fuel a necessity. However I suspect the advent of work-at-home via internet may be becoming even more effective.

 

We have become far too dependent on "big city" social organisation, and massive transportation of the necessities of life. The big cities are dreadfully dependent on an extremely complex infrastructure, and the vulnerability of that was demonstrated very clearly by the fuel strikes in the early '80s; Sydney reverted almost to the law of the jungle in only two weeks. So I got out of it and based myself a hundred miles from the nearest big city, and worked mainly by Fax, until the internet forced broadband. I drive maybe two hours a week, instead of two hours a day.

 

I looked hard at solar, back when the subsidies made it appear attractive - but when I studied it in detail, it was clearly going to tie up my finances for 25 year or so, before it would pay off - and I did not trust the Govt. policy on subsidies. Independence is attractive, but at age 65 (at that time) the prospect of locking up one's finances for 25 years is not all that attractive. So we purchased a wood-burning stove instead, since we have an abundance of firewood, and insulated the roof. We're independent of water supply.

 

I am inclined to the view that we can do more at less cost by reducing the inefficiencies of our way of life, than by grasping immature technology in an attempt to sustain the other inefficiencies. I'm all for technology, but not unthinking application of it. One of the really big inefficiencies is the "throw-away" society. Yes, I have a 1948 Ferguson tractor and a 1965 one, both still in daily use. It pains me to see tens of thousands of tons of coal being exported every day to sustain what I see as stupidly inefficient life styles. And our system of Government is almost totally ineffective in dealing with this; it is far too preoccupied in simply getting re-elected. it's a mob of free-loaders simply surfing on the swell. I would not feed any of them if I had the choice.

 

I do not share the quasi religious fervour of "global warming" (which I note has now declined to "Climate change" in the media). Yes, it's changing, but it always has, and always will. But I do see that we are squandering resources recklessly, due to gross inefficiency. Inefficiency is something we can address at a personal level.

 

[ATTACH]47452._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

[turboplanner]

This is what I see constantly...when you can't put together a cohesive argument, then insult will do.

Well that's exactly what you did! Called us filth if I remember, so how about coming up with the facts, or did you just make it all up in the excitement of the moment?

 

 

[Methusala]

Bexrbetter and Dafydd have made some telling points in this discussion and have much more information to impart from a personal perspective than do I. I do resent the implication that my views are guided by <quasi religious fervour of "global warming">. I cannot see that mass depletion of polar ice sheets, a succession of warmest years or decades outstripping any historical trends nor measured increase of atmospheric CO2 equates to dodgy shrouds of Turin or "miracles" at Lourdes. Anyway, still waiting for a reasoned defence of feeding potable water to a few lousy sheep. Huh?

 

 

[turboplanner]

OK dopey, I'll try again; that's what comes out of the supply pipe.

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Anyway, still waiting for a reasoned defence of feeding potable water to a few lousy sheep. Huh?

Where do you live Meth? In the burbs or in the real world?

 

 

 

I just have to comment that if you think that watering stock with town water is a major crime, or an environmental issue, then you must really be oozing meth.

 

 

 

The next thing you will require is that everyone's dogs only be permitted to drink out of a creek.

 

 

 

I, like you, do believe in Global Warming, I just don't accept that human activity is the major cause, or indeed that we in Oz can make a measureable difference that justifies turning our economy on its head so that you and a few others can have a feel-good outcome.

 

 

 

I believe that global warming (and cooling) has been & is part of the earth's normal cycles, like the movement of the magnetic poles ........... and having read all of Ian Plimer's books, I believe that the geological record proves that. Prof Plimer reckons that the next cooling cycle started in 1978. I hope he is right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Governments are up themselves if they think they can influence this natural phenomenon by the likes of their pink batts/kill-a-few-kids scheme.

 

 

 

But in the meantime, the UN keeps fudging their figures and the BOM adjust their data base to make warming look more demonstrable, for the likes of you to re-tweet without critical review.

 

 

 

If you really do want to make a fair-dinkum difference to global warming (and this forum), go over the Iceland and sit atop that Volcano that is about to pop .... and stop it from erupting.

 

 

 

Kind regards Geoff

 

 

[octave]

Captain - do you perhaps mean Ian Plimer?

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Captain - do you perhaps mean Ian Plimer?

You are spot-on Ocky.

 

 

 

Sorry about that & thanks.

 

 

 

Have edited it accordingly.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

The global scientific conspiracy against big oil and coal?

 

Is the same strategy tobacco company used through the 30-60's deny, discredit people, deny, discredit science, deny.

 

 

[octave]

as well as being Professor of earth sciences Ian Plimer is quite involved with the mining industry

 

"Plimer is the former non-executive director of CBH Resources Limited from 1998 to 2010, former non-executive director of Angel Mining plc from 2003 to 2005, former director of Kimberley Metals Limited from 2008 to 2009, former director of KBL Mining Limited from 2008 to 2009 and former director of Ormil Energy Limited from 2010 to 2011.[3][16]

 

He is currently the non-executive deputy chairman of KEFI Minerals Plc since 2006,[17] independent non-executive director of Ivanhoe Australia Limited since 2007,[18] chairman of TNT Mines Limited since 2010,[11][19] non-executive director of Niuminco Group Limited (formerly DSF International Holdings Limited) since 2011,[20][21] and non-executive director of Silver City Minerals Limited since 2011.[3][16][22][23][24] Plimer was appointed director of Roy Hill Holdings and Queensland Coal Investments in 2012.[25]

 

According to a columnist in The Age, Plimer earned over $400,000 (AUD) from several of these companies, and he has mining shares and options worth hundreds of thousands of Australian dollars.[26] Plimer has stated that his business interests do not affect the independence of his beliefs.[22] He has also warned that the proposed Australian carbon-trading scheme could decimate the Australian mining industry.[6][27]"

 

The idea that CSIRO is fudging the data to maintain it's funding seems a little odd to me. Given that this government is cutting CSIRO funding would it not make more sense (if our scientist are only motivated by funding) to provide this government with the data they would support the governments position?