greens are

[storchy neil]

service to property charges 07 08 2017 $126.85 dollars

 

now take that the electricity supplier has for sake of round figures 100,000 customers for each of them is paying these supply charges =100,000 x $126.85 =

 

plus charging you 33 cent for each kw you use

 

but paying me 65 cents for solar excess to my needs 700 kw x 65 =

 

service to property charges 17 1 2009 $46.78 dollars

 

now take that the electricity supplier has for sake of round figures 100,000 customers for each of them is paying these supply charges =100,000 x $46.78 =

 

plus charging you 17 cents for each kw you use gee that bad coal

 

from what I can see coal power was 8 cents kw to generate the state government up the royalty to make it dearer another scam by the vic gov so as they could scam with clean solar but its only clean when its up and running don't worry about china getting polluted with that bad carbon and the money for manafactureing them

 

so my take on that is that the so call green power is a scam base load will not work from a battery oh if you cover vic in this battery it might work but there you go not in my back yard.

 

proposed solar set up at Tatura vic only going to cost $50,000000 dollars to build plus the blow out cost of another mill or two take long time to get your money back or are they going to run ponsiy scheme

 

oh no just charge more for electricity

 

india is building coal fired power stations

 

china as some say is smog covered but you exported so many jobs and industry there what in the hell do you expect no pollution

 

nev nw tasie the wind would not be to good when I was down that way I had to fill me pockets with stones to stop it blowing me away made it hard to walk up hill the fans would be turned off more because off to mutch wind neil

 

 

[octave]

india is building coal fired power stations

Wind power India total installed capacity 32279Mw Target by 2022 60000Mw

 

Solar power India total installed capacity 12288Mw Target by 2022 100000Mw

 

Renewable energy in India - Wikipedia

 

India Cancels Nearly 14 Gigawatts Of Proposed Coal Plants

 

Renewable energy in China - Wikipedia

 

so my take on that is that the so call green power is a scam base load will not work from a battery oh if you cover vic in this battery it might work but there you go not in my back yard.

Can you give facts and figures to support your assertion that battery storage is impossible???

 

so my take on that is that the so call green power is a scam base load will not work from a battery oh if you cover vic in this battery it might work but there you go not in my back yard.

The Tesla battery installation in Los Angeles (80Mw) covers 1.5 Hectares

 

A look at the new battery storage facility in California built with Tesla Powerpacks

 

Let's face it Neil, your objections are not practical but ideological. What ever happens humans will progress beyond the fossil fuel age just as they progressed from riding horses to driving cars.

 

In 1903 the Wright brothers first flight was a mere curiosity but intelligent visionary people could see that this technology was the future. 66 years later, humans walked on the moon.

 

 

 

[willedoo]

Australian Constitution 01/01/1901

 

Part IV Both Houses of Parliament

 

44. Disqualification

 

Any person who:

 

1. is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power; or
    
   

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

 

An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of Australia

 

[9th July 1900]

 

6. Definitions

 

The Commonwealth shall mean the Commonwealth of Australia as established under this Act.

 

The States shall mean such of the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia, including the northern territory of South Australia, as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth, and such colonies or territories as may be admitted into or established by the Commonwealth as States; and each of such parts of the Commonwealth shall be called a State.

 

Original States shall mean such States as are parts of the Commonwealth at its establishment.

 

....... New Zealand wasn't always classified as a foreign power. It was originally meant to be one of the Original States of the Commonwealth of Australia.

 

It's a confusing piece of paper. Clause 3 of the preamble has no mention of New Zealand, but by clause 6, it's proposed as part of the Commonwealth of Australia.

 

3. Proclamation of Commonwealth

 

It shall be lawful for the Queen, with the advice of the Privy Council, to declare by proclamation that, on and after a day therein appointed, not being later than one year after the passing of this Act, the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, and also, if Her Majesty is satisfied that the people of Western Australia have agreed thereto, of Western Australia, shall be united in a Federal Commonwealth under the name of the Commonwealth of Australia. But the Queen may, at any time after the proclamation, appoint a Governor-General for the Commonwealth.

 

 

[octave]

Renewable Energy Surges Globally with China and India in the Lead

 

 

China leads the charge on renewable energy

 

While there are impressive gains happening everywhere in the world, China is a dominating force on the renewable energy front. Moreover, the country has made important strides in beginning a historic shift away from coal. There’s obviously a long way to go to make the deep cuts in CO2emissions in line with the long term goals of the Paris Agreement but this is a promising start.

 

Here are some recent facts:

 

• In January, China announced a plan to invest $360 billion in renewable energy through 2020, with a goal of creating 13 million jobs.
   
  
• The 13thFive Year Plan, covering 2016–2020, also sets ambitious targets for non-fossil capacity: By 2020, the country expects to install 340 GW of hydropower, 200 GW of wind, 120 GW of solar power, as well as 58 GW of nuclear capacity and 15 GW of biomass.
   
  
• China has recently cancelled over a hundred proposed coal-fired power plants, totaling 120 GW.
   
  
• China has also allocated $14.5 billion to help transition displaced workers to new jobs, although its too early to tell how successful those efforts have been to date.
   
  
• Data show that China’s coal consumption has likely peaked, contributing to 4 years of level or slightly falling energy-related CO2 emissions.
   
  
• A recent analysis from Climate Action Tracker shows that with the actions it has already taken, and has committed to taking in the near future, China is on track to meet or even exceed its Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement.
   
  

 

India’s RE ambitions matched by real action on the ground

 

Meanwhile, in India, a recent study points out that a historic transformation of the power sector is already underway. While coal still dominates India’s power supply and much more will be needed to drive down carbon emissions across the economy, here are some reasons for optimism:

 

• India’s 2016 Draft Energy Plan includes a goal of 175 GW of renewable energy capacity by 2021-22, up from about 43 GW currently.
   
  
• India’s Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission aims to install 100 GW of solar capacity by 2022. Equally important, through a combination of policies, this initiative’s goal is also to aggressively bring down the costs of solar power to achieve grid parity in that same timeframe. If that goal is met, it has huge implications for the affordability and ramp up rate of solar power not just in India but world-wide.
   
  
• India’s solar market is heating up (some would even say over heating). Solar capacity installations are expected to reach nearly 10 GW this year. Solar power tariffs in India have reached record lows recently, dropping 25 percent in just three months to reach 1¢/kWh to 5.6¢/kWh in recent auctions. While these rock-bottom prices may not be sustainable in the near term (or desirable), they are a clear indication of which way the market is headed.
   
  
• The Draft Energy Plan also concluded that no new coal-fired power plants would be needed through 2027, beyond the 50 GW currently under construction. In fact, just last month India cancelled nearly 14 GW of proposed coal-fired power plants, and found that 8.6 GW of existing coal-fired power plants may no longer be economically viable.
   
  
• India is also keenly interested in electric vehicles, exploring options to fully electrify vehicles by 2032. It’s a radical idea, with a lot of challenges, and is not an official government goal (yet). But the excitement and interest in clean innovation is palpable.
   
  
• Analysis from the Climate Action Tracker also shows that India is on track to exceed its current Paris Agreement commitments, with room to raise ambition if it chooses.
   
  

 

 

[spacesailor]

BUT look at them now. Willedoo

 

Western Australia still wants the same as NZ

 

spacesailor

 

 

[willedoo]

BUT look at them now. WilledooWestern Australia still wants the same as NZ

 

spacesailor

Do you mean more sheep?

 

 

[Bruce]

Storchy is correct in that battery power is not going to provide base-load when its dark and windless. It was going to cost $1000 for batteries which would work the wife's fridge for a day, and yes I am a cheapskate but I am also quite expert on batteries.

 

Nuclear could provide base-load but it is taboo because of stupidity. Scrubbing the smokestacks to get the CO2 from a coal-fired plant is something that I doubt would be economically viable but we should keep an open mind.

 

Personally, I lost money on the hot rocks projects. They seemed to promise base-load that greens would not veto. Alas, the stainless bore-casings rusted out too fast.

 

 

[facthunter]

Nuclear is expensive. takes ages to construct. It's not happening there. Batteries are only one way to store electricity. Balance between supply and usage requires quick adjustments. Coal Expensive with NEW constructed powerstations and NOT flexible A coupla billion dollars each. Tied to a fixed expensive grid. Any one here likely to put their money where their mouth is and invest your money. If the banks won't do it you know more than they do? Nev

 

 

[Bruce]

There are often nuclear reactors in Sydney. Big american carriers have 2 of them.

 

Why this does not enrage the greens is a mystery to me.

 

Why a big nuclear power station in outback South Australia is considered more dangerous than reactors in Sydney harbor is insane.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Concentrated reflected solar heating molten salt. Low tech (big mirrors instead of solar panel), great country for it with lots of sunshine in many areas, creates stored potential energy which can turn generators at any time of day or night.

 

 

[octave]

Storchy is correct in that battery power is not going to provide base-load when its dark and windless.

The purpose of the battery bank is not merely to provide power when the wind does not blow but to store power generated when it is cheap and then distributing it when the generators are charging high prices. It is more about evening troughs and spikes in demand.

 

Whilst this is leading edge technology it is certainly not the first battery storage facility. I find it hard to believe that Tesla and Elon Musk are pushing something that can't possibly work, why risk a huge business like that in order to make a one-off profit. The good thing is that it won't be long before we know how effective this technology is.

 

I personally don't have a philosophical objection to nuclear power. Whilst technology has improved since the earlier and less safe nuclear plants we have to consider the worst case scenarios. I am not sure I would invest my own money in a nuclear power plant if I would be financially responsible for the effects of an admittedly rare accident. I think fusion will be the long term answer in the future.

 

For more info All The Details On Tesla's Giant Australian Battery

 

What Experts Have To Say About Tesla's Giant Australian Battery

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Nuclear power is expensive to build, but this is more politics (both government and corporate) than safety driven. The EPRs are Areeva's attempt at being the greatest and old-school type reactors; Small Module Reactors can plumb into existing nuke sites (isolating the original reactor) and they are also a lot cheaper to run - you can literally have a module sitting on a flatbed and when it's time to refuel it's plug out and in in a day )a typical refuel in a PWR is about 30 days if all goes well.. At c. £1m/day downtime, you can see the savings. The Fukashima (sp?) plant plant withstood a lot more that it was designed for and the plant blew because the diesel generator that was charged with running while power to the plant was interrupted was placed with 20/20 hindsight, in a ridiculously low position taking into account seismic and tidal risk assessments. But Nuclear is still much safer than coal/gas and less harmful to the environment if waste is managed properly (and not dumped in the Colorado river, from memory).

 

With an improvement in storage technology, renewables become more viable. Yes, at this stage, just like any "new" technology (PVs have been around a while, but not on the scale required), per unit costs are high, but as amortisation and economies of scale kick in. There will be bumps on the way - anything new generally has that. But I congratulate SA for their foresight and vision and berate the Aussie government for not working to ease the burden on the consumer in transitioning to a cleaner, safer energy industry.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I think the main problem with nuclear fission energy is the safe storage of the waste. It really isn't safe anywhere as seismic activity can cause leakage to the atmosphere and some of the more dangerous isotopes have half lives in the thousands of years. Nuclear fusion is the real answer but until we work out how to harness it for more than a few seconds it is pie in the sky. The main detractor to Nuclear power is the publicity from the accidents. There was 1 in the UK, 1 in France several in the US including the big one, 3 mile island plus of course Chernobyl & Fukushima. Chernobyl of course caused a lot of deaths and major health problems in Ukraine, Russia & Scandinavia. Storage technologies are advancing at a massive rate so any argument to continue with fossil fuel energy is extremely short sighted.

 

Not only that but I hear Germany, Holland, Norway France & the UK are to ban petrol & diesel vehicles from 2040. The end of the non renewable energy industry is underway.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's the SALE of NEW vehicles. (just to clarify). Nev

 

 

[Marty_d]

Interesting to see the difference in style.

 

Ludlum and Waters (Greens) found out they had dual citizenship, quietly packed their bags and left.

 

Canavan (LNP) is found out to have dual citizenship, apparently his Mummy did it and didn't tell him, now it's going to the High Court.

 

Hmmmm....

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

@kgwilson - agree the storage of the nuclear waste is an issue - but it can be reprocessed and re-used; although as with any such endeavour there are risks throughout the network so something could go wrong - I think there was an event at Sellarfield quite a few years ago - contained in the reactor building, but some unlucky punter was exposed to dangerousl levels of radiation for some period of time. I am long out of the nuclear business (though may be making a return in the near future) and as back then, suitable storage is an issue with Outback Aus being touted as a suitable palce (low population, most of the stuff comes from there and seismically stable). Concrete casings would take an eternity to erode (unlike dumping them in a river, FFS). But, of course, there is a risk of something going drastically wrong when moving the waste from its source to the Outback...

 

EDF is building a new reactor about 5 miles from where I live. Given their past record, I don't expect it to be live in my lifetime - but one never knows. It is expensive to build partly because of over-onerous regulation - but not as much as say CAA/EASA GA regs, partly because that's just how much it costs to build something like that which is still unproven (though the Flamanville plant now has reg green light providing the replace the steel cap of the reactor within 2 years) and partly because the design is, let's say less than optimal, but Areeva and EDF are too pig-headed to concede it and re-design something more practical.

 

In any country (with foresight), the energy mix will move to renewables and it will be cheaper. There is an interim period where traditional methods such as fossil and nuclear will have to smoothen the demand peaks and renewable supply troughs, so the question is how long before storage tech becomes viable enough (remembering that if you pack a whole lot of energy in a small place, if it goes bang - it will be a big one) to hold enough juice to smooth the demand and supply curves. If one thinks it's 10 years away, nuclear isn't going to be a good bet, because, esp for a country without existing nuclear infrastructure (except Lucas Heights - if it is still running or there has been a replacement) , there is a lot of regulatory hurdles to set up before they can be jumped, there will be the political angle tp address, etc. That in itself would consume quite a few years (take a look at Hinkley Point - and that is being built on an existing nuke site). Even 20 years is a tough call.. If we think it is still 30 years away, then there may be some benefit by building nuclear.

 

I think the generation topology will change over time, too. At the moment, large generating stations is the go because of the technology required to produce it in sufficient quantity. But as storage becomes better, we may move to a different model, where each property generates the energy it needs and stores it on site and when the draw is too much, it taps into the grid It's quite a few years off more due to cultural shift than technological shift, but in the long term, big central generators will be much fewer in number.

 

And yes - the UK has stated that it will ban the sale of new "conventional" petrol and diesel cars by 2040, but as someone pointed out, what is the definition of convention and the petrol and/or diesel engine may be radically different to what they are now, so they are not sure what the ban will actually mean. Volvo has announced it will stop making diesel engines - I think by 2020..

 

 

[facthunter]

Again, It's a pure diesel or petrol that will be dropped. They will all be hybrids or electric. Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Today the Business Council have pleaded with the government to drop the idea of new coal, and go with Finkel. I suppose THEY are just a mob of greenies. "Coal is the answer Grandfather would have built"... Nev

 

 

[willedoo]

Interesting to see the difference in style.Ludlum and Waters (Greens) found out they had dual citizenship, quietly packed their bags and left.

 

Canavan (LNP) is found out to have dual citizenship, apparently his Mummy did it and didn't tell him, now it's going to the High Court.

 

Hmmmm....

It shouldn't matter whether Mum or Santa Claus made you do it, or whether you knew about it or not - the Constitution is very specific on no dual citizenship.

 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. The average bloke in the street could understand that clause of the constitution any day of the week. Why do we need a bunch of old farts in wigs to dictate what they think our constitution means. What a toss.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...Personally, I lost money on the hot rocks projects. They seemed to promise base-load that greens would not veto. Alas, the stainless bore-casings rusted out too fast.

I was pretty keen on hot rocks technology as well, Bruce. It all went quiet. I'd love to know why.

 

SS rusting out?

 

 

[facthunter]

Some people may have an automatic entitlement to another countries citizenship. It can be pretty complex , and even constitutional lawyers have differing opinions, so it's not just black and white. Nev

 

 

[willedoo]

Some people may have an automatic entitlement to another countries citizenship. It can be pretty complex , and even constitutional lawyers have differing opinions, so it's not just black and white. Nev

44. Any person who -

 

(i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power.

 

Looks fairly black and white to me.

 

 

[facthunter]

So.... Are you really qualified?. This stuff will end up in the high court probably. Nev

 

 

[willedoo]

It firmly states a citizen of a foreign power. The only grey area is to determine if the person actually does have another nationality. If that is determined, they are not qualified to be in Parliament. There's no mention in Section 44 about any reasons why the person might have dual nationality, only that it disqualifies them.

 

The thing it doesn't cover is by whose laws a person has citizenship and whether that's recognized by our law.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I'll was going to play play devils advocate and focus on the meaning of the term, "citizen".But this disqualification courtesy of @Cosmick,

 

"is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power; or a foreign power; or"

 

And the words "entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foregin power" kicked my argument to touch... A judge would have to use very creative interpretation (or draw on any potentially conflciting parts of the constitution) to see otherwise.

 

As I understand, judges can make law where there is no statute or there are gaps/scenarios not considered in the statute.. but that does seem pretty clear cut and appears a referendum would be required to change it.